*** Offical Rating on a 1 to 10 Scale *** (1 Viewer)

[(HULK)]

On this board, we are often asked to rate a person (usually a female) on a 1 to 10 scale.

Other than a general consensus that a score of 10 is good and that a score of 1 is bad, there really are no other factors in place. Making the rating totally arbitrary and meaningless.

I purpose a meeting of the minds in this thread. Questions need to be debated and we need to come to a consensus on what this scale means. Is 1 to 10 seen as a percentile of the general population? As a percentile of people in a similar age range or a group that could be considered their peers? As a sort of bell curve where the majority of the population falls in the 3 to 7 range and a 1 or 10 is a rare, statistical anomoly?

Please, lets start the debate right now. Once a few options have come forth, we can have an offical vote. Then, the offical policy will be set.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

I think we've failed to get an agreement on this in the past.

 

[(HULK)]

I think we've failed to get an agreement on this in the past.

We don't need an agreement. We just need to boil it down to a few options and then let a vote decide the winner.If you have a stance, now is the time to make it.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

1 is Dom Deluise covered in spaghetti sauce, sweating from the strain of eating, in boxers, black socks, and nothing else surrounded by empty take out cartons.

10 is the 1998 version of Catherine Zeta Jones, posed provocatively on your bed, in light fetish wear.

 

[[icon]]

I think it's pretty simple:

10 - Absolute perfection.. EXTREMELY rare

9 - About the hottest chick you can see on a semi regular basis

8 - Very Very hot normal chick... perhaps 1 flaw (ie smallish breasts... thick-ish ###....etc

7 - A hot woman... perhaps a smoking face but average bod or vice versa

6 - Above average woman... typical with a few plusses

5 - Your average chick... nothing remarkable... nothing too flawed

4 - Slightly Below average

3 - Pretty bad looking woman

2 - Butt ### ugly chick

1- :X :X

EDIT TO ADD: I think too many people rate an AVERAGE chick as a 7... a 7 is a pretty damn hot chick.

 

[(HULK)]

]I think it's pretty simple:

10 - Absolute perfection.. EXTREMELY rare

9 - About the hottest chick you can see on a semi regular basis

8 - Very Very hot normal chick... perhaps 1 flaw (ie smallish breasts... thick-ish ###....etc

7 - Above average woman

6 - Sligtly Above average woman

5 - Your average chick... nothing remarkable... nothing too flawed

4 - Slightly Below average

3 - Pretty bad looking woman

2 - Butt ### ugly chick

1- :X :X

So, you're saying a bell curve here?

 

[[icon]]

,May 30 2006, 04:03 PM]I think it's pretty simple:

10 - Absolute perfection.. EXTREMELY rare

9 - About the hottest chick you can see on a semi regular basis

8 - Very Very hot normal chick... perhaps 1 flaw (ie smallish breasts... thick-ish ###....etc

7 - Above average woman

6 - Sligtly Above average woman

5 - Your average chick... nothing remarkable... nothing too flawed

4 - Slightly Below average

3 - Pretty bad looking woman

2 - Butt ### ugly chick

1- :X :X

So, you're saying a bell curve here?

most definiltey

 

[doctor Gunks]

]perhaps 1 flaw ... thick-ish ###

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

 

[(HULK)]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

This is another question that must be addressed.Are we counting Austrailian Bush women as part of the overall group? Or, is it just women from the socio-economic north within an age range of 15 or so years of the person in question?

 

[doctor Gunks]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly.  What does it mean to be "average?"  Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Well, that's silly. The scale should be uniform.

 

[(HULK)]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly.  What does it mean to be "average?"  Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

I'm on the fence on this issue.I agree on the instinctive part. But what if two polls are on the front page, and one is rating an okay looking model (probably getting 6s and 7s) and one is rating an Eskimo chick who is hot (legitimately an 8 or 9 against her peer group, but if she held to the same standard as the model is, she'd be getting 6s and 7s).

Someone sway my vote here.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly.  What does it mean to be "average?"  Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

I'm on the fence on this issue.I agree on the instinctive part. But what if two polls are on the front page, and one is rating an okay looking model (probably getting 6s and 7s) and one is rating an Eskimo chick who is hot (legitimately an 8 or 9 against her peer group, but if she held to the same standard as the model is, she'd be getting 6s and 7s).

Someone sway my vote here.

Gotta support the uniform scale. Otherwise there have to be geriatric 10s and supermodel 1s. It just doesn't make sense.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Just go with the Homer J Simpson Dual Hotness Scale.

There's a celebrity chick scale and a regular chick scale. Pretty simple, really.

 

[(HULK)]

Gotta support the uniform scale. Otherwise there have to be geriatric 10s and supermodel 1s. It just doesn't make sense.

This is sound logic.But will people really think about comparing an american girl next door to starving ethiopean girl?

 

[GregStarling]

]

,May 30 2006, 04:03 PM]I think it's pretty simple:

10 - Absolute perfection.. EXTREMELY rare

9 - About the hottest chick you can see on a semi regular basis

8 - Very Very hot normal chick... perhaps 1 flaw (ie smallish breasts... thick-ish ###....etc

7 - Above average woman

6 - Sligtly Above average woman

5 - Your average chick... nothing remarkable... nothing too flawed

4 - Slightly Below average

3 - Pretty bad looking woman

2 - Butt ### ugly chick

1- :X :X

So, you're saying a bell curve here?

most definiltey

I agree w/ bell curve.

 

[culdeus]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

I don't know who you're talking about, but if she's pitching a product on TV she's probably at least an 8. Your scale is wrong.

 

[perry147]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Well, that's silly. The scale should be uniform.

No it is not silly. The scale needs to be inclusive of the "type" woman variable.Example:

Housewife:

Housewife

Movie Star:

Movie Star

 

[culdeus]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

I don't know who you're talking about, but if she's pitching a product on TV she's probably at least an 8. Your scale is wrong.

I need someone with directv to back me up here.

 

[Apes with Guns]

]I think it's pretty simple:

10 - Absolute perfection.. EXTREMELY rare

9 - About the hottest chick you can see on a semi regular basis

8 - Very Very hot normal chick... perhaps 1 flaw (ie smallish breasts... thick-ish ###....etc

7 - A hot woman... perhaps a smoking face but average bod or vice versa

6 - Above average woman... typical with a few plusses

5 - Your average chick... nothing remarkable... nothing too flawed

4 - Slightly Below average

3 - Pretty bad looking woman

2 - Butt ### ugly chick

1- :X :X

EDIT TO ADD: I think too many people rate an AVERAGE chick as a 7... a 7 is a pretty damn hot chick.

who's the guy with the mohawk in your avatar? because, I want to beat him up.sorry.

 

[The_Hunchback]

I purpose a meeting of the minds in this thread.

 

[(HULK)]

I purpose a meeting of the minds in this thread. 

 

[EYLive]

I'd go with a uniform bell curve. Although there will be a lot more in the low range (1-3) than in the high range since being ugly takes less effort.

 

[Alias]

Pick an age range and a locale

25-30 age range

United States of America

Take all women that meet that criteria and slice them up into buckets.

10 = top 0.5% (could go even thinner here I guess)

9 = next 9.5%

8 = next 10%

:

1 = bottom 10%

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Just go with the Homer J Simpson Dual Hotness Scale.

There's a celebrity chick scale and a regular chick scale. Pretty simple, really.

 

[Woz]

It's hard because I think a lot of guys rate girls on the scale of what they think they could get. For example, if I see a girl who I'm pretty sure I could get and she does somewhat spark my interest, I'd give her a 5 or a 6. A girl I'd really be interested in hooking up with I'd give a 7 or 8. One absolutely perfect or beautiful that I'd marry in a heartbeat I'd give a 10. But again, this is all based on my perspective. A guy who is much more attractive than me or much less would adjust the same set of girls up or down his prospective curve. For example what I'd call a 6, Brad Pitt may see as a 3. Or what I call a 6, some fatass alcoholic bum might call an 8 or a 9.

 

[culdeus]

I'd go with a uniform bell curve. Although there will be a lot more in the low range (1-3) than in the high range since being ugly takes less effort.

Why not a normal distribution centered around 3 then? Standard deviation of 2 and you are all set.

 

[(HULK)]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly.  What does it mean to be "average?"  Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Well, that's silly. The scale should be uniform.

No it is not silly. The scale needs to be inclusive of the "type" woman variable.Example:

Housewife:

Housewife

Movie Star:

Movie Star

I don't know about this. If measured against other housewives, that woman is an 8 or a 9, while Teri Hatcher is a 6 or 7 against other movie stars.So, it would almost seem that this woman is hotter than Teri Hatcher because people are giving her 9s while giving Hatcher 6s. Which just doesn't sit right with me.

 

[kupcho1]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

I don't know who you're talking about, but if she's pitching a product on TV she's probably at least an 8. Your scale is wrong.

I need someone with directv to back me up here.

Based on the [icon]-ometer, she's a solid 6

 

[[icon]]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Gunks is wise

 

[The_Hunchback]

Just go with the Homer J Simpson Dual Hotness Scale.

There's a celebrity chick scale and a regular chick scale.  Pretty simple, really.

You have a reached new low. The problem is I agree, I think. It really depends on my mood and how I feel at the time.

 

[SuperJohn96]

1 is Dom Deluise covered in spaghetti sauce, sweating from the strain of eating, in boxers, black socks, and nothing else surrounded by empty take out cartons.

10 is the 1998 version of Catherine Zeta Jones, posed provocatively on your bed, in light fetish wear.

You and I are opposite in every possibly way my friend.

 

[FUBAR]

I'd go with a uniform bell curve. Although there will be a lot more in the low range (1-3) than in the high range since being ugly takes less effort.

That is a fair point, although it shouldn't be the case. Uniform bell curve is the only way, I wouldn't recognize all celeb females.

 

[FUBAR]

1 is Dom Deluise covered in spaghetti sauce, sweating from the strain of eating, in boxers, black socks, and nothing else surrounded by empty take out cartons.

10 is the 1998 version of Catherine Zeta Jones, posed provocatively on your bed, in light fetish wear.

You and I are opposite in every possibly way my friend.

You think Dom is a 10?

 

[culdeus]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

I don't know who you're talking about, but if she's pitching a product on TV she's probably at least an 8. Your scale is wrong.

I need someone with directv to back me up here.

Based on the [icon]-ometer, she's a solid 6

plusses?We've broken this girl down to the nth degree with each new commerical. If I could find pics on their website I'd link them.

She's got:

Bad dye job on hair

Jacked up smile

No breasts to speak of

5 pounds underweight for her frame

Slight horse face

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly.  What does it mean to be "average?"  Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Gunks is wise

But this is contrary to the way the "scale" is typically used. When someone posts a picture and asks for a "rating," I shouldn't have to know her age and her job and her location to rank her.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

Just go with the Homer J Simpson Dual Hotness Scale.

There's a celebrity chick scale and a regular chick scale. Pretty simple, really.

You have a reached new low. The problem is I agree, I think. It really depends on my mood and how I feel at the time.

I reach a new low every day I get out of bed, chief.

 

[perry147]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Well, that's silly. The scale should be uniform.

No it is not silly. The scale needs to be inclusive of the "type" woman variable.Example:

Housewife:

Housewife

Movie Star:

Movie Star

I don't know about this. If measured against other housewives, that woman is an 8 or a 9, while Teri Hatcher is a 6 or 7 against other movie stars.So, it would almost seem that this woman is hotter than Teri Hatcher because people are giving her 9s while giving Hatcher 6s. Which just doesn't sit right with me.

But it should because on the normal woman scale the Housewife is smoking and on the Celeb scale Hatcher is average; even though if Hatcher was a housewife she would be a 10.

 

[Homer J Simpson]

,May 30 2006, 04:35 PM]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Gunks is wise

But this is contrary to the way the "scale" is typically used. When someone posts a picture and asks for a "rating," I shouldn't have to know her age and her job and her location to rank her.

Right. You should just have to know if she is a celbrity or a regular chick.

 

[kupcho1]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

I don't know who you're talking about, but if she's pitching a product on TV she's probably at least an 8. Your scale is wrong.

I need someone with directv to back me up here.

Based on the [icon]-ometer, she's a solid 6

plusses?We've broken this girl down to the nth degree with each new commerical. If I could find pics on their website I'd link them.

She's got:

Bad dye job on hair

Jacked up smile

No breasts to speak of

5 pounds underweight for her frame

Slight horse face

We're talking about 2 different people then. The one I'm thinking of may have had a dye job, doesn't have much up top and smiled like she was under the influence of something, but the last two don't really apply. Still, she was better than average.

 

[(HULK)]

Well, to figure out how to go from 1 to 10 you need to decide what/who is a 5 before what/who is a 10.

Buddies and I have agreed in the past that the Directv innernet girl (red hair) that's on all the time for commercials is exactly a 5.000

You have to center the curve first to get anywhere.

I don't know who you're talking about, but if she's pitching a product on TV she's probably at least an 8. Your scale is wrong.

I need someone with directv to back me up here.

Based on the [icon]-ometer, she's a solid 6

plusses?We've broken this girl down to the nth degree with each new commerical. If I could find pics on their website I'd link them.

She's got:

Bad dye job on hair

Jacked up smile

No breasts to speak of

5 pounds underweight for her frame

Slight horse face

She is leporesy free?Her downstair might be red?

Her skin is clear?

 

[FUBAR]

You should just have to know if she is a celbrity or a regular chick.

Most (not all) celebrity chicks were "regular" chicks at one time. Except Drew Barrymore and the Olson twins, there aren't many hotties that started out as celebs.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

1 is Dom Deluise covered in spaghetti sauce, sweating from the strain of eating, in boxers, black socks, and nothing else surrounded by empty take out cartons.

10 is the 1998 version of Catherine Zeta Jones, posed provocatively on your bed, in light fetish wear.

You and I are opposite in every possibly way my friend.

I'm frightened.

 

[SuperJohn96]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly. What does it mean to be "average?" Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Well, that's silly. The scale should be uniform.

No it is not silly. The scale needs to be inclusive of the "type" woman variable.Example:

Housewife:

Housewife

Movie Star:

Movie Star

I don't know about this. If measured against other housewives, that woman is an 8 or a 9, while Teri Hatcher is a 6 or 7 against other movie stars.So, it would almost seem that this woman is hotter than Teri Hatcher because people are giving her 9s while giving Hatcher 6s. Which just doesn't sit right with me.

We need a Football based analysis of women ratings as if each category was a different NFL position...so we can compare um...peaches to peaches...as it were QB: Real life girl next door types

RB: Celebrities (Movie/TV/Model, etc)

WR: Porn Stars

PK: Real life MILFs

And so on...

We need to establish a baseline, so that (just for example)

10 out of 10 QB is say, a 6.5 out of 10 RB

10 out of 10 WR is say, a 6 out of 10 RB

10 out of 10 PK is say, a 4 out of 10 RB

Okay, wait...how about an example...say we gave NCStateGirl (QB) a 10 out of 10. She would be a 6.5 compared to Jessica Alba (RB) a 10 out of 10 celebrity.

Thoughts?

 

[(HULK)]

You should just have to know if she is a celbrity or a regular chick.

Most (not all) celebrity chicks were "regular" chicks at one time. Except Drew Barrymore and the Olson twins, there aren't many hotties that started out as celebs.

Another good point.Right now I'm thinking general population is the offical scale. If someone wants to use another scale, they could just outline that in their poll.

 

[(HULK)]

Icon's ratings don't really answer your question very clearly.  What does it mean to be "average?"  Are you looking at all women in the world or just American women between certain ages?

Instinctively, I think women are rated against their peer group. For instance, porn stars are rated against other porn stars. If someone takes a pic of their next door neighbor, it's rated against your average American female of roughly the same age group.

Well, that's silly. The scale should be uniform.

No it is not silly. The scale needs to be inclusive of the "type" woman variable.Example:

Housewife:

Housewife

Movie Star:

Movie Star

I don't know about this. If measured against other housewives, that woman is an 8 or a 9, while Teri Hatcher is a 6 or 7 against other movie stars.So, it would almost seem that this woman is hotter than Teri Hatcher because people are giving her 9s while giving Hatcher 6s. Which just doesn't sit right with me.

We need a Football based analysis of women ratings as if each category was a different NFL position...so we can compare um...peaches to peaches...as it were QB: Real life girl next door types

RB: Celebrities (Movie/TV/Model, etc)

WR: Porn Stars

PK: Real life MILFs

And so on...

We need to establish a baseline, so that (just for example)

10 out of 10 QB is say, a 6.5 out of 10 RB

10 out of 10 WR is say, a 6 out of 10 RB

10 out of 10 PK is say, a 4 out of 10 RB

Okay, wait...how about an example...say we gave NCStateGirl (QB) a 10 out of 10. She would be a 6.5 compared to Jessica Alba (RB) a 10 out of 10 celebrity.

Thoughts?

I like your line of thinking, but I think this is too complicated to get people to follow.

 

[SuperJohn96]

1 is Dom Deluise covered in spaghetti sauce, sweating from the strain of eating, in boxers, black socks, and nothing else surrounded by empty take out cartons.

10 is the 1998 version of Catherine Zeta Jones, posed provocatively on your bed, in light fetish wear.

You and I are opposite in every possibly way my friend.

You think Dom is a 10?

:whoosh:

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Right now I'm thinking general population is the offical scale. If someone wants to use another scale, they could just outline that in their poll.

That's what I've been pushing for, but there are admittedly problems. If you're looking at world population as a whole, pretty much any woman we're asked to rank is a 9 or a 10. I think you've gotta limit it at least to "of childbearing age."