Alright, since you’ve given the only remotely rational response, I’ll pass the ball on to you. Would you be interested in making guesses about me based on my own OKC pictures, and then learning how right or wrong your guesses are?
G-Max
Karma: −39
THERE. ARE. NO. SIGNALS.
THERE. IS. NO. INFORMATION.
Uh, no… there’s nothing sexual about leaning toward a camera or putting a hand near your chin. Come on, I shouldn’t have to explain this on a wiki devoted to rationality.
She has a white flower in her hair, and there’s a brick wall behind her. There’s absolutely NOTHING about either of these things to suggest whether she is urban or rural, nor what her income level is, nor anything remotely sexual. The ear bling (are those supposed to be skulls?) is unusual, but is no more indicative of being a “hipster” than it is of being a goth, or maybe it’s something that her best friend made for her at summer camp ten years ago and she still wears it because said friend died in a car accident. We have no bloody idea whatsoever.
Silly neurotypicals… always overestimating their own mind-reading abilities :/
I’m now quite interested in posting some pics of myself and seeing what ridiculous conclusions you draw from them. Are you game?
First of all, “subcultural signals she’s throwing out”? What the hell? She’s not throwing out subcultural anything.
Second, that’s not how OKcupid works. Member’s don’t rate each other’s overall profiles. They rate individual pictures.
Third… holy crap, “full goth regalia” is an actual phrase used by people other than me? It’s the exact same one that I made up for myself to refer to my outfit! Small world, eh?
Who in the nine circles of Hell would give the girl on the right a “1”? There’s some dishonest rating going on here.
“Ratings on a 10 point scale are imprecise”
Wrong. If anything, it’s TOO precise. Attractiveness is “fuzzy”. If you asked me to rank Angelina Jolie on a 5-point scale, I’d give her a 4 without hesitation, but on a ten-point scale, I have no idea what she’d be. 7? 8? On a 5-point scale, 4 means “above average but not top-tier”. On a 10-point scale, is there any meaningful difference between a 7 and an 8? It’s like trying to decide whether a color is “maroon” or “crimson” when any sane person would just say “dark red”.
On the other hand, everyone agrees that Nancy Pelosi is a 0 on any scale :)
Upvoted for remembering that Ash was the science officer and not just the movie’s token android.
“But dang, that argument my teacher explained to me sure was sound-looking! I must just be lucky—those poor saps with other teachers have it wrong!”
This is actually something I’ve been wondering about regarding the disproportionate overlap between libertarianism and anthropogenic global warming skepticism. I’d like to think that this disproportionate overlap is because both views stem from a rational and objective assessment of the available data, but at the same time, I can’t deny that anthropogenic global warming would throw a monkey wrench into libertarian philosophy if it was real, so being skeptical of it saves us from doing an awful lot of mental gymnastics...
Given the politicians we have in office, I’d say that “multiple people making the same mistake” is a fairly common phenomenon :)
But please, explain exactly what information you think she’s conveying and why you think that this is the most probable explanation for… whatever you think you’re seeing.