Getting one's appearance rated on the Internet

>>18038363

i think its not a bad idea. just keep in mind that in general rate threads you arent getting an honest rate.

in rate threds many people are ignored unless they throw a fit, then they get lower scores for throwing that fit.

most people who do rate you will rate you slightly higher because they want to also be rated back as well.

most rates don't give you details etiher so its useless.

if you post a picture here ill give you an honest rate and tell you why you get that rate.

Depends how insecure you are. If you're going to give up on life just because some people gave you a low rating, then you're probably better off living in the dark.

If you're going to actually use those rating productively and improve yourself based on them, while also remembering to take those ratings with a grain of salt, it can be good for you.

Also, remember to average them. I used to try to figure out where I lied as I was in the process of losing weight and such with soc. Now, soc is a bit of a cess pool, so I put more stock into keeping an eye on strangers in public. How much attention people paid me, shit like that.
Anyway, I'd go in a thread on soc, get as many rates as I could, and average them out. You have to remember that taste is subjective. One man's 1/10 is another's 10/10. Thats why you can't get too excited over a high rate, but also can't get too down over a low rate.
I would suggest searching for "improvement threads" rather than general rate threads. People will be more inclined to be honest, since you're all looking to improve.

>>18038368
>most people who do rate you will rate you slightly higher because they want to also be rated back as well.
Or the opposite at times too, people spite rate, I've seen it happen lol.
I've also found on rate threads, nobody rating you is usually a bad sign because of this.
Since people don't want to get any spite rates, they ONLY choose to rate people in the 6+ range. Because it's also customary in those threads not to rate anyone who hasn't given any rates, since theyre not participating.

>>18038391

>spite rates

kinda convered that with the complaining the ngetting low rates but those are valid points as well.

if no ones rating you it depends on the mood of the thread, sometimes you're not ugly, you just aren't really attractive in anyway.

but yeah in those threads you usually only see people rated from like 4 through 10. sometimes if someones exceptionally ugly they'll go lower, but they tend to keep it at 6 and up for the most part.

>>18038399
Ah yeah but I was referring to the situation of, you rate someone low who posted before you, therefore they rate you low back.
Like I've been in a couple threads where I've seen the same people. I had one dude rate me an 8 the first time, but then the next thread I was in with him, I gave him a 5 so he rated me 4 kek. Same exact picture too. It was just that he was salty with me personally that I gave him a low rating.

>>18038363
The truth is as a guy if you take care of your appearance, aren't fat or have some weird disfigurement, looks matter little, it's mostly about your attitude towards people.

>>18038416
Pretty much this. If you think about the differences between male and female sexuality
Men are more visual, they like to see what they want.
Women are more mental, they want to be in that head space.
Therefore, women tend to gussy up their appearance to appeal sexually to the visual based guys, where as men will want to work on their charm to appeal to the mental based women.
Now it's not 100% one way or another, there's varying degrees to it all. Women still won't fuck a completely hideous guy so long as he's charming enough, same as guys won't fuck the hottest chick in the world if she's absolutely bat shit insane. Or at least, normal men and women.
But we have our leans. If you're a guy, have a decent appearance, don't be a slob. But if your aim is attracting women, you'd be better off working on your confidence and talking skills than your looks.