Rate the Intelligence of the User Above You

http://nmaps.net/user/Tunco123 · Postby **Tunco** » 2009.03.07 (06:49)

70/100

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.08 (03:20)

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.08 (08:45)

562/1000.

http://nmaps.net/user/Tunco123 · Postby **Tunco** » 2009.03.08 (12:09)

876756876/100000000

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.08 (12:43)

Just a reminder of a good scale to use:

Obby old forums wrote:Once again, a rating thread isn't correctly rated.

- 5 is average. It means the person is normal.
- 6 is a bit above average. Nothing amazing.
- 7 is a good deal above average. This person would be grades ahead of classmates.
- 8 is near genius. This person dominates others in any setting.
- 9 is top of the line. This would only include those few people in human history who are so brilliant, many don't understand it.
- 10 omniscient. No on here is 10.

No one here is 10. No one is 9. It is extremely rare that anyone be an 8. Most fall between 5 and 7.

You don't have to adopt this scale, but it's the most realistic, if that's what this thread is shooting for.

For Tunco, I'd say about 5.5.

http://nmaps.net/user/pni · Postby **Pixon** » 2009.03.08 (13:07)

I will adopt that scale.

6.5, 29403.

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.08 (21:59)

http://nmaps.net/user/isaacx · Postby **isaacx** » 2009.03.09 (00:41)

56/100

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.09 (07:08)

5.1 as I to will adopt such a scale.

http://nmaps.net/user/Tunco123 · Postby **Tunco** » 2009.03.09 (16:59)

29403 wrote:Just a reminder of a good scale to use:

Obby old forums wrote:Once again, a rating thread isn't correctly rated.

- 5 is average. It means the person is normal.
- 6 is a bit above average. Nothing amazing.
- 7 is a good deal above average. This person would be grades ahead of classmates.
- 8 is near genius. This person dominates others in any setting.
- 9 is top of the line. This would only include those few people in human history who are so brilliant, many don't understand it.
- 10 omniscient. No on here is 10.

No one here is 10. No one is 9. It is extremely rare that anyone be an 8. Most fall between 5 and 7.
You don't have to adopt this scale, but it's the most realistic, if that's what this thread is shooting for.

For Tunco, I'd say about 5.5.

I'll adopt too:
5.2.4

http://nmaps.net/user/donfuy · Postby **Donfuy** » 2009.03.10 (20:24)

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.10 (20:30)

I would go for around 6.5 for Donfuy.

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.11 (05:55)

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.11 (08:01)

Nothing special really, shown to be a bit daft silly sometimes. :/ 5.3/10.

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.11 (08:03)

4/100000

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.11 (08:04)

5.3/10.

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.11 (08:04)

4.9.7

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.11 (08:06)

4.9/7?

7/10?

5.3/10 :/

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.11 (10:31)

I meant 4.97/10 or 497/1000. Just using a fancy way of writing it.

6.0.1

http://nmaps.net/user/Tunco123 · Postby **Tunco** » 2009.03.11 (14:36)

5.01257

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.11 (16:01)

5.5/10.

http://nmaps.net/user/rikaninja · Postby **Rikaninja** » 2009.03.13 (05:19)

5.9.9

http://nmaps.net/user/29403 · Postby **29403** » 2009.03.13 (07:32)

http://nmaps.net/user/Tunco123 · Postby **Tunco** » 2009.03.13 (13:53)

5.8.2.9.7.8.999
(sorry but I don't want to make it 5.5...)
or nevermind:
5.5

http://nmaps.net/user/Guitar_Hero_Matt · Postby **MattKestrel** » 2009.03.13 (20:37)

4 :)

Be very, very careful guys.

Metanet Forums

Rate the Intelligence of the User Above You

Who is online