SL/RLex Ratio extended: SL/RL Promiscuity Index
August 6, 2007 3:10 am
Loki Popinjay took the SL/RLex Ratio a bit further with his SL vs. RL Promiscuity Index, another way to compare your SLex life to your RLex life. He says the Promiscuity Index is more accurate because:
- The SL/RL Promiscuity Index takes into account the periods where we are more actively engaged in be it SLex or RLex.
- The PI takes into account that - opposed to in Second Life - you can’t be ‘active’ from day one in RL.
- The PI goes out from the idea that ‘life’ evolves 5 times faster in SL than in RL.
After doing the maths, I ended up with a Promiscuity Index of 0.5, which puts me in the SL promiscuity is smaller than the RL promiscuity category. I’m really a good girl in SL, it seems. ;)
My main remark on the PI is that imho 16 would be a better age to start counting then 18. I assume that’s the legal age in most countries?
And what’s Promiscuity? From the dictionary:
| A | noun | |||
| 1 | promiscuity, promiscuousness, sleeping around | |||
| indulging in promiscuous (casual and indiscriminate) sexual relations | ||||
15 Responses to “SL/RLex Ratio extended: SL/RL Promiscuity Index”
OK, if I come up with a PI of 43.6 … do I have a problem here? *blushes*
LMAO. That and a very good memory! =d
My PI is 0.62, not sure if i’m too good in SL, or really good in RL… Btw, really interesting this RL/SLex investigation you are doing ;-)
I wonder if the investigation takes a lot of “field research”…
just to see if the maths and formulas are correct, of course..
@veronique: Field research is the core of scientific work. You wouldn’t believe how much work went into this one *grins*
What??!
I quote: “‘life’ evolves 5 times faster in SL than in RL.” and “imho 16 would be a better age to start counting then 18.”
Do I get this right: that means an SL avatar needs to be at least THREE years and a few months old before they should have cybersex??
Does this mean I have been creating and publishing ‘childporn’ without realising?! ;-P
So far always requested avatars to be at least 18 HOURS old!
No, no. 16 to start counting for the RLex. As for the childpr0n. Dunno. Depends on what you consider broadly offensive. ;)
So far always requested avatars to be at least 18 HOURS old! => (LMAO)²!!!
Unless I am getting this very wrong, this formula assumes that an older RL age will make you more promiscuous?
assuming: 2 RL partners, 2 SL partners and SL age = 6 months:
at RL age = 20 then index = 0.8
at RL age = 30 then index = 4.8
at RL age = 40 then index = 8.8
I just hope there aren’t any octogenarians in SL!!!!!
Zaphod, that is the only reason I came up with such a high PI. I’m an old guy, no other reasons for it, I swear! ;-)
@Zaphod: It is logical you get different values at different ages if the rest of the variables doesn’t change. Someone who has 5 partners in 5 years time is more promiscuous then someone who has had 5 partners in 20 years time. No ?!
Now, as stated:
index > 1 = RL promiscuity
Oh great, my “greater/smaller then” symbols got parsed…
ok … rest of the story:
If your PI is greater then 1 it means you are more promiscuous in SL then you are in RL. The higher your PI the bigger the difference.
I think it still holds water. I have to agree with other posters though that 16 is probably a more reasonable RL starting age.
Why can’t you just say ‘agree with Vint’? *grins*
*grins* because you were not the only one pointing it out…. Tenchi for instance did as well in a comment on the original post :-)
But, since I like to see you happy I’ll hereby publically state “I’ll agree with Vint the age should be 16″
There, happy? *winks*
Yep, you just made my day! ;)
[…] one person at a time. My sex life alternates from celibacy to promiscuity. When Vint tried that math about number of second life partners, I remained silent. Not that I was shy to tell, I had no clue about the […]
Care to comment?