Trusted, Automoderated users
25,837
edits
Talk:Scientific Blackpill: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
::I am aware of that, but is it really an issue? The page is 4 MB (75% images) which is average for 2019: https://www.seoptimer.com/blog/webpage-size/ I just tested RAM usage, which seems to be less than 100 MB. It scrolls perfectly fine with my 2013 midrange smartphone. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 23:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC) | ::I am aware of that, but is it really an issue? The page is 4 MB (75% images) which is average for 2019: https://www.seoptimer.com/blog/webpage-size/ I just tested RAM usage, which seems to be less than 100 MB. It scrolls perfectly fine with my 2013 midrange smartphone. [[User:Bibipi|Bibipi]] ([[User talk:Bibipi|talk]]) 23:52, 18 November 2019 (UTC) | ||
* https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6004239/High-flying-career-women-refusing-marry-despite-struggling-Mr-Right.html | * https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6004239/High-flying-career-women-refusing-marry-despite-struggling-Mr-Right.html | ||
==Tappé 2013, Matticka 2010== | |||
: [https://incels.wiki/w/Scientific_Blackpill#Men_like_61.9.25_of_female_profiles.2C_women_like_only_4.5.25_of_male_profiles . Overall, men liked or superliked 61.9% of their female profiles. On the other hand, women only liked 4.5% of the male profiles, a sex ratio that is fairly close to the sex ratio in agreement to unsolicited invitations to sex in non-online naturalistic settings (e.g. Clark & Hatfield 1989, Tappé 2013, Maticka-Tyndale 2010).] Tappé was not a naturalistic setting, and it had many different results. Also where in Matticka does it show that? I can't find the full text, but no summary mentions findings like Hatfield and Clark. | |||