What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The super "OFFICIAL" Offdee Scale with Photos (1 Viewer)

Carver

Footballguy
You submit photos for consideration labeled as followed, based on the official Offdee Scale:

- Ugly/Meh (1-5)

or

- Cute (6-7)

or

- Hot (8-10)

10: Almost flawless and very rare. Could be a top model, top playboy centerfold, (nationally amazing, the MENSA of hotness)

9: The hottest girl at the club, The hottest girl at school, etc (more locally amazing)

8: One of the hotter women at the club, one of the hotter girls at school, (upper class of hot women)

7: Cute girl at the club, in classes, at work, in apt building. Definitely cute, but not tops locally.

6: Fairly attractive, no major flaws but maybe minor ones

5: Starting to be unattractive, but certain qualities work in her favor. Nothing major, but minor problems are more common

4: Not attractive. Major flaws start piling up (overweight, blemishes, etc.)

3: One of the uglier girls in school, one of the uglier girls at work (lower class of ugly women)

2: The ugliest girl in school, the ugliest girl at work (couldn't even get into a club)

1: Absolutely disgusting and hard to look at. Young children point and adults look away upon seeing (not one single redeeming quality)**

**Birth Defects, Physical deformities, and other such things that will stamp your ticket to hell for making fun of are **STRICTLY PROHIBITED**.

No Tom Foolery. Serious submissions only! These images will represent all future OFFICIAL FFA number scale assignments. No small task.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a dumb way to get examples for an official scale.
Yeah I think it would be better to vote what's a 10, 9, etc. and come up with a consensus.
Right, the way to do it would be to provide a picture and have people vote on the rating. I think you can do like five polls per thread or something. Continue the process until you have some representative samples where the rating averages "10", "9", etc. I suspect the most difficult part will be finding pictures for the upper end of the scale. No matter how attractive someone is, there are always at least some voters who won't give a 9 or 10.
 
This is a dumb way to get examples for an official scale.
Yeah I think it would be better to vote what's a 10, 9, etc. and come up with a consensus.
What could happen is everyone drafts their 10 women. Then polls are created to see if they actually graded correctly according to FFA voting and a score is created from how far away the drafter's grade was. The "winner" of the draft would be the person with the lowest score. Then the FFA voting would create the scale going forward.
 
This is a dumb way to get examples for an official scale.
Yeah I think it would be better to vote what's a 10, 9, etc. and come up with a consensus.
Or, you could do this draft to compile a total of 100 photos with a solid range and then somehow vote off of those 100 photos submitted to come up with the perfect 1 thru 10 range.- Put all the 10 photos together in a voting poll....everyone votes for the best "10"- Put all the 9 photos together in a voting poll....everyone votes for the best representation of a "9"And do that all the way down to "1"ETA: the problem with this is there will always be pics in the "8" bucket (for example) that many will feel should be part of the "9" or "7" groupings instead. May create some inaccuracies possibly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think we have to have one picture that represents the "10" all the way to "1"

Example, we vote that one particular picture of Adriana Lima is the "10" even though she may look like an 8 in another photo.

This way there is one defining image of each number.

 
I think we have to have one picture that represents the "10" all the way to "1"Example, we vote that one particular picture of Adriana Lima is the "10" even though she may look like an 8 in another photo.This way there is one defining image of each number.
There are pictures of Adriana where she doesn't look like a 10? :shock:
 
I think we have to have one picture that represents the "10" all the way to "1"Example, we vote that one particular picture of Adriana Lima is the "10" even though she may look like an 8 in another photo.This way there is one defining image of each number.
There are pictures of Adriana where she doesn't look like a 10? :shock:
She's a rough sleeper, I'll take some pictures tomorrow morning just after she wakes up so you see what I mean. And she's annoying and grouchy in the morning; pretty much ready to dump her.
 
How about this....

Rather than having a "Draft" we just have people randomly submit pictures for the rest of the week.

When submitting those pictures you need to label them as a submission in the appropriate bucket.

Submission buckets:

- Ugly: 1 thru 4

- Average/Cute: 5 thru 7

- Hot: 8 thru 10

In the 2nd post of this thread Carver compiles all submissions and put them under the appropriate bucket. Than we somehow do votes to figure out which pic submitted within that bucket, best represents "10", "9", "8", etc...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a dumb way to get examples for an official scale.
Yeah I think it would be better to vote what's a 10, 9, etc. and come up with a consensus.
Or, you could do this draft to compile a total of 100 photos with a solid range and then somehow vote off of those 100 photos submitted to come up with the perfect 1 thru 10 range.- Put all the 10 photos together in a voting poll....everyone votes for the best "10"- Put all the 9 photos together in a voting poll....everyone votes for the best representation of a "9"And do that all the way down to "1"ETA: the problem with this is there will always be pics in the "8" bucket (for example) that many will feel should be part of the "9" or "7" groupings instead. May create some inaccuracies possibly.
Inaccuracies in a completely subjective poll about a ridiculous scale? No, never never.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
How about this....

Rather than having a "Draft" we just have people randomly submit pictures for the rest of the week.

When submitting those pictures you need to label them as a submission in the appropriate bucket.

Submission buckets:

- Ugly: 1 thru 4

- Average/Cute: 5 thru 7

- Hot: 8 thru 10

In the 2nd post of this thread Carver compiles all submissions and put them under the appropriate bucket. Than we somehow do votes to figure out which pic submitted within that bucket, best represents "10", "9", "8", etc...
This has legs...
 
How about this....

Rather than having a "Draft" we just have people randomly submit pictures for the rest of the week.

When submitting those pictures you need to label them as a submission in the appropriate bucket.

Submission buckets:

- Ugly: 1 thru 4

- Average/Cute: 5 thru 7

- Hot: 8 thru 10

In the 2nd post of this thread Carver compiles all submissions and put them under the appropriate bucket. Than we somehow do votes to figure out which pic submitted within that bucket, best represents "10", "9", "8", etc...
This was my original intent this morning. I just dont have the time to take the leadership role like Carv has done
 
OP updated... Should I open up a submissions thread for the "10"'s?
It's going to be hard to judge what is a "10" without knowing the rest of the scale. That's why I feel like rating individual pictures makes more sense. The scale would gradually get more robust, like wikipedia or something.
 
OP updated...

Should I open up a submissions thread for the "10"'s?
Why not just keep it all here for now?Just have people submit pics in this thread through Friday and when they submit the pic they label it as a submission for

- Ugly (1-4)

or

- Average/Cute (5-7)

or

- Hot (8-10)

Just use this thread to compile all pics first for larger buckets, and then figure out how to go about voting appropriately into individual #'s.

 
Are we using a regular girl scale or celebrity scale?
You're using this scale. There is no difference...# is based on the pic presented (doesn't matter if they're famous, normal, airbrushed or otherwise)10: Almost flawless and very rare. Could be a top model, top playboy centerfold, (nationally amazing, the MENSA of hotness)9: The hottest girl at the club, The hottest girl at school, etc (more locally amazing)8: One of the hotter women at the club, one of the hotter girls at school, (upper class of hot women)7: Cute girl at the club, in classes, at work, in apt building. Definitely cute, but not tops locally. 6: Fairly attractive, no major flaws but maybe minor ones5: Average. starting to be unattractive, but certain qualities work in her favor. Nothing major, but minor problems are more common4: Not attractive. Major flaws start piling up (overweight, blemishes, etc.)3: One of the uglier girls in school, one of the uglier girls at work (lower class of ugly women)2: The ugliest girl in school, the ugliest girl at work (couldn't even get into a club)1: Absolutely disgusting and hard to look at. Young children point and adults look away upon seeing (not one single redeeming quality
 
I think we have to have one picture that represents the "10" all the way to "1"Example, we vote that one particular picture of Adriana Lima is the "10" even though she may look like an 8 in another photo.This way there is one defining image of each number.
There are pictures of Adriana where she doesn't look like a 10? :shock:
The full pic of my avatar she's got a scary caveman look going on. That's why it's cropped.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top