To: Junkyardawg who wrote (53380 ) 10/30/2004 6:01:54 AM From: Bill Ulrich Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 57110 Dawg, it's kinda of a suspense teaser, ain't it? <g> But there's always a silver lining, in any cloud. Pretend you're at a bar. People's own image of themselves is often a bit "enhanced" from what real life perception actually is. One might think they're "the stuff", but you never really know. You'd like to know just which chix dig you off the bat, but there's no crystal ball for that. There's the coyness and hoops and various rejections that have to be experienced. This new SI feature is interesting, whatever the warts. You're Peoplemark-to-Ignore ratio is 96:4. Does it matter if 4 chix in the bar think you're butt-ugly when 96 wanna take you home? That's a better batting avg. than even Barry Bonds on triple-mega-gazupula steroids. 4 weeks ago, I had Peoplemark of 78. Today, it's 86. But my Ignore mark is 6. I have no idea what happened in four weeks to raise my positive count, but even so, my 6 ignores put into the ratio leave me at a 14.2 overall. You, dawg, are a lovehammer, with 96:4 computing into a solid 24.0 (!) And despite the fact that (ahem...) "all" women love BenWobbles, a 329:28 ratio simply indicates flaccidity with an 11.75 score. But with good marketing, he can always make it up in volume. <g> So, "which four" is sort of a non-issue. Jorj and I should just be glad it's anybody at all. You get the pick of the litter! Whatever its flaws, it's actually an interesting twist compared to "real life" hunt & peck. <vbg>"Ok, now I'm bummed out. I see from my profile that 4 people have me on ignore....now why in the world would anyone ignore me? Hmmmmm ok, I'm a little insecure..... who could they be? I'z just gotz ta know!!!!"