18 comments

[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 81.1 ms ] thread
This was a fun little project I did last weekend to familiarize myself with Google App Engine and jQuery.
Is the order of the selection randomized each time?
Doesn't look like it. Which renders the results mostly useless.

What should be presented is how far they moved from the initial order.

I just changed it to be randomized based on your comment, and reset the ranking. Before that it ranked them based on average score, which has the problem of creating a winner-takes all situation. Thanks!
I have a question: Could I see little portrait pictures of the celebrities next to their name?
What's your Browser/OS? It is supposed to have pictures.
(comment deleted)
OSX with Firefox. I'll try Safari too.

EDIT: It works correctly in Safari.

Looking at the results, this appears to be almost certainly the case that the initial order of the set isn't random.
After your comment, I changed it to be random.
Thank you for making my day. I have a long way to go. Long way.
doesnt work on touch devices
I found myself making decisions based on things other than attractiveness alone.

This might be better done w/ unknown stock photos. But I realize it's really just an exercise in programming.

I think it might be a good idea to do pairwise comparison instead.
This tells me a lot about what you think is attractive. To be honest, only 2 of the celebrities were ones I would consider to be on the attractive side of the coin.

Currently, gaunt looking women, are considered "attractive". Many of these women are extremely thin or have unusual bone structure.

Megan Fox and Olivia Wilde, for instance, are really unattractive women. (I personally like Olivia Wilde quite a bit as an actress, and bear no ill will against Megan Fox)

There are a huge variety of women out there, and from my perspective, you've presented a list consisting only of a narrow range of the spectrum.

No offense intended, this is meant to be honest feedback.