Look how for medium-high and medium the percentages go down.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re pointing at here. Can you explain more? Every category of female sender is monotonically less likely to send messages to less attractive males, as you would expect, without any consideration of spam.
Upper right, 0.03 messages from high->low male receivers.
One row down, 0.02 messages from medium-high->low male receivers.
To me I mentally see this as 0.01 to 0.03 of these messages are motivated by something other than attractivness, aka financial. It could be just noise.
Also, if some fraction of males are presenting an extreme profile (a-la Jacob of putanumonit) they could be rated low attractiveness “on average” while still getting messages from the tiny fractional percent of females of each attractiveness band who are interested in that unique profile.
I’m not sure I understand what you’re pointing at here. Can you explain more? Every category of female sender is monotonically less likely to send messages to less attractive males, as you would expect, without any consideration of spam.
Upper right, 0.03 messages from high->low male receivers.
One row down, 0.02 messages from medium-high->low male receivers.
To me I mentally see this as 0.01 to 0.03 of these messages are motivated by something other than attractivness, aka financial. It could be just noise.
Oh yeah, I agree that’s a bit weird but I would guess it’s just noise.
Also, if some fraction of males are presenting an extreme profile (a-la Jacob of putanumonit) they could be rated low attractiveness “on average” while still getting messages from the tiny fractional percent of females of each attractiveness band who are interested in that unique profile.