The rating system

[DMBFan23]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
1 - wouldn't do her
2 - do her after some shots
3 - I'd hit it

[/ QUOTE ]

Revised to:

1 - wouldnt hit it
2 - would hit it when intoxicated
3 - would hit it, but wouldnt tell anyone
4 - would definitely hit it
5 - would hold her hand in public

[/ QUOTE ]

the tucker max scale?

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
Revised to:

1 - wouldnt hit it
2 - would hit it when intoxicated
3 - would hit it, but wouldnt tell anyone
4 - would definitely hit it
5 - would hold her hand in public

[/ QUOTE ]
haha. i predict in a year we will have about 4 or 5 more clever and funny revisions and the ratings system will be 1-30. i can't wait [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

[DMBFan23]

I predict the next addition is "would eat the ass."

now the question is which two numbers does it fit in between?

[JonPKibble]

I'm surprised nobody has ever brought up the idea of variance in the rating system before.

[Vavavoom]

There is no such thing as a 1 on that system...

A "1" naked, in your bed, wanting to play anal ring toss, befoe riding you silly and willing to keep it a secret from your pals would still get action...

Thus most men would not turn down a "Bunk-Up".....therefore rating is futile.

However, I have yet to sh*g a "1" !!!!

[tdarko]

[ QUOTE ]
I predict the next addition is "would eat the ass."


[/ QUOTE ]
clearly before holding hands.

[CollinEstes]

Is the rating after holding hands something like, "would let her bone me in the ass with a strap on."

How does the rating required to SIIHP compare to the rating required to simply bang her? Higher or lower? or about the same?

in most cases, likely

[WackityWhiz]

3 in my book

2 in my book



1 in my book

-WW