Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

Experiment Ratings Explained

I

_incelinside

☆☆☆☆☆
★★★★★
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Posts
12,119
There isn't a widely accepted standard for PSL ratings so is my interpretation of the rating scale that makes the most sense to me.

PSL ratings go from 1-9
1 is alive but severely deformed the lowest rating approaches 1 so nobody can be a 1. Only a 1.0000...1
9 is nonexistent, the more ideal the man the more his rating will approach 9
Follows a normal distribution so the majority of guys will be withing the 4-6 range
4 is 20th percentile
6 is 80th percentile

Alot of male models aren't all of a high 8+ PSL rating since it takes into account sex appeal to women which some may lack.
Some raters choose to take into account height and frame while some don't. (I do because it is important for presence and sex appeal)

Subhuman (bottom 20 percent) are sub 4
Low tier normie = 4
Normie = 5
High tier normie = 6
6+ is chadlite
7+ is chad
8 is wide appeal gigachad who has access to pretty much all women
8-9 is where we begin to approach the singularity and things get wild, It's the equivalent of being a multimillionaire (low 8's) to a billionaire (high 8's). The sexual market flips to your advantage girls will begin treating you like a celebrity, you will get random catcalls on the street and random women will throw themselves at you aggressively,
 
PSL ratings range from 1 to 9, 9s do exist and are given to male models but I don't agree with those ratings at all. 10s do not exist.
 
0 also exists tbh. 0s are people that you can't classify as human based on their looks
 
This is my rating scale.

1-2s are deformed.
3s are just really ugly.
4s are failed normies.
5s are slightly above average normies
6-7s are upper-tier normies/Chad-lites.
8s are Chads.
9s are Giga Chads.
10s are unicorns.
 
Give me an example of someone you rate a 9 (never seen you rate anyone above an 8)
I'll get back to you on this when I find one.
 
Women's rating scale:
0:Unattractive (ewwwwwww get the fuck away creep!)
1:Attractive in some way shape or form
 
my scale
0 deformed
1 very ugly
2 ugly
3-4 failed normie
5 average normie
6 high tier normie
7 chad lite
8 chad
9 giga chad
10 there is no true 10
 
my scale
0 deformed
1 very ugly
2 ugly
3-4 failed normie
5 average normie
6 high tier normie
7 chad lite
8 chad
9 giga chad
10 there is no true 10
I like this one
 
What would you rate Matthew Noszka he is the most ideal chad in my book
You're not gonna like my answer boyo. It depends on his pictures, he looks the worst in selfies, and the best in professional pictures. I would put him between 6.25 - 7.25, halo'd hard by other factors such as height. I imagine he'd be a 7.5, possibly 8 if he had young Leonardo diCaprio hair.
 
This is my rating scale.

1-2s are deformed.
3s are just really ugly.
4s are failed normies.
5s are slightly above average normies
6-7s are upper-tier normies/Chad-lites.
8s are Chads.
9s are Giga Chads.
10s are unicorns.
Sort of use the same scale as you except chadlite starts at 7, chad at 8 and gigachad at 9 and then 10 is non existent.

I’m somwhere between 4-5. Shit frame/height but the rest is pretty average

1.00001 to 8.99999 makes the most sense though, it means the ratings are symmetrical (same amount of people 5+ as sub 5) and 5 can be the mean
 
Last edited:
1.00001 to 8.99999 makes the most sense though, it means the ratings are symmetrical (same amount of people 5+ as sub 5) and 5 can be the mean
4.5 is the mean for me! That's why 4s are failed normies and 5s are slightly above average.
 
What did you think of my rating of your quintessential Chad?
Fair enough for his face from a purely aesthetic point of view tbh but height and frame should be included in the overall rating, he probably has one of widest sex appeal of all men so should be a bit higher imo
 
Fair enough for his face from a purely aesthetic point of view tbh but height and frame should be included in the overall rating, he probably has one of widest sex appeal of all men so should be a bit higher imo

If I included other factors, then yeah he's an 8-8.5... but I don't take that into account, I just focus on the face but I do realize that you're going to have more appeal when you're older. At least you're taking it better than the sperglords here who just scream at me because I think Sean O'pry & David Gandy are 6.5s. Kek.
 
Here's my scale

Non white scale

1-7=subhuman

8-10= slayer

If you are sub8 ethnic it's over that's why I'm incel



White scale


1-4 =subhuman

5-10= slayer

White guys could slay as 5s because they can get ethnics paki/Asian bitches with ease

As you can see the Jbw theory is legit, comparing the threshold scale limit for both atractiveness for both non white and white shows that whites have it super easy. This is why majority of whitecels are fakecels,

@theultimate341 thoughts
 
Here's my scale

Non white scale

1-7=subhuman

8-10= slayer

If you are sub8 ethnic it's over that's why I'm incel



White scale


1-4 =subhuman

5-10= slayer

White guys could slay as 5s because they can get ethnics paki/Asian bitches with ease

As you can see the Jbw theory is legit, comparing the threshold scale limit for both atractiveness for both non white and white shows that whites have it super easy. This is why majority of whitecels are fakecels,

@theultimate341 thoughts
giphy.gif

giphy.gif

agreed 100% youre not human to women if youre a sub 7 ethnic. Whites have it the easiest I wager that a 4/10 white guy can still get bitches if hes tall with white features.
 
If I included other factors, then yeah he's an 8-8.5... but I don't take that into account, I just focus on the face but I do realize that you're going to have more appeal when you're older. At least you're taking it better than the sperglords here who just scream at me because I think Sean O'pry & David Gandy are 6.5s. Kek.

You can't rate for shit if you don't think Noska's face alone is fast approaching an 8 and if you rate Gandy and O'pry as 6.5. Let me guess, you rate someone like Twisted a 7?
 
You can't rate for shit if you don't think Noska's face alone is fast approaching an 8 and if you rate Gandy and O'pry as 6.5. Let me guess, you rate someone like Twisted a 7?
No Twisted is 6,5. Just go back to lookism dude I can smell you are one of them retards.
 
No Twisted is 6,5. Just go back to lookism dude I can smell you are one of them retards.

JFL - he is a 5, maybe 5.5, facially - millions of white guys look like that. With due respect bro, you are deluded to give Twisted the same rating as fucking Sean O'Pry.
 
JFL - he is a 5, maybe 5.5, facially - millions of white guys look like that. With due respect bro, you are deluded to give Twisted the same rating as fucking Sean O'Pry.
Only when he is clean-shaven, he looks just as good as Sean. Sean looks like a friggin alien, kek.
 
no rating scale is truly accurate tbh, looks are more than numbers
 
5 seems about right, o’pry mogs the shit out of me.

Better eye area, much better lower third and bonemogs me to oblivion.

Overall I’m around a 4 due to shit frame and height
Opry is a strange case. He looks godly like in Taylor swifts blank space. But he looks like an aspie in candids
 
5 seems about right, o’pry mogs the shit out of me.

Better eye area, much better lower third and bonemogs me to oblivion.

Overall I’m around a 4 due to shit frame and height

Agreed, if you are really 5'7 like you say.
 

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top