-
-
Your kidding right ??
A supposed self reported net "study" should not be worth wasting 5 min on like I just did .
Actually I suggest it is a hoax from beginning to end and no actual study was ever done it is wrong on many levels . Sort of half assed clever if you assume the people reading it are waayyyy gullible and don't think things through for all of oohhh a min . -
That's what I was hoping but it made me feel worse when I read it because I'm not even 6 inches and reading stuff like that alway's makes me feel more depressed.Comment
-
Then stop reading stuff like that, maybe?
You never slow down, you never grow old!Comment
-
Dude seriously don't you have any dude friends? All of mine say their penis is 14-16cm and this study says 18cm! That's a big length. Seriously only 2.5% of people have such a long dick and this study says its the mean? Go get yourself together.Originally posted by maxymoon View PostStarting Stats: BPEL:6.4" MEG: 4.5" (18/02/2018)
Current: BPEL:7.0" MEG 4.6" (25/08/2018)
Goal: BPEL 7.5"+ MEG: 5"+
Check out my progress log: https://www.pegym.com/forums/progres...-my-stick.htmlComment
-
I didn't even make it half way through the very first sentence, "Using data from the website www.cocksizecontest.com", had a good laugh and didn't even bother to read any further.To totally satisfy a woman sexually is not about having a large penis, it's about being a good lover.Comment
-
I have to admit, somebody put a lot of work into that...
My favorite line:
"what the distribution ofsizes is, and offer some suggestions about where qualitative terms like “small”, “average”,“large”, and “hung” should come into use..."03/2015 Start <Able to last ~ 2 mins PIV>
Thread
12/2019 EL: +2.2 MEG: +1 <Able to last 60+ mins PIV>Comment
-
Ok, I read through the paper, while it is missing any references/citations apart from web site data, even that is not actually references in any standard format.
I'd say it is fairly well thought out, except for one big but:
"We consider this data to represent a cross section of the general population, with some caveats. One natural bias in the userbase would be that a site such as CSC will select for men that are confident enough about their size to take part in comparisons with other men....it is unlikely that we are missing a significant proportion of small men, nor is there any correlation with how much effort a man is willing to put into being verified on a site such as CSC and the mean size"
This is an important consideration. As many here can testify, putting up a dick pic is not something people are wont to do.
In the end we have a total number of users at 1383, but only 263 are photo verified. And the caveat here is that the "photo verified" is not really a true verification. Note:
"...one must confirm their email address, and upload a “bulge pic”, which is a photo of their penis in underwear, swimwear, or similar, to give a suggestion of the actual size without giving away the exact number"
then
"The final step is to upload a “verification” pic, which includes a photo of one’s username next to their penis, so that the site administrator has proof that the photos belong to the user in control of the account. Many users who upload verification pics will also upload pictures of their penis being measured, according to specific instructions on the site."
The obvious problem with the data here is that "Many users who upload verification pics will also upload pictures of their penis being measured". The "many" is not quantified.
And the author(s) then just breeze over it: "we will consider the “photo verified” subset to be accurate". So the results are based on self reported data that is verified only by a bulge picture. Meaning we have a data set of 263 subjects who are self-reporting their size and verifying said size with a bulge picture. Not exactly meeting scientific standards.
If we assume the usual 2.5cm (or 1 inch) exaggeration, or rounding up, that number of 18cm for mean can easily be assumed to be really 15.5cm. Well within already verified studies.03/2015 Start <Able to last ~ 2 mins PIV>
Thread
12/2019 EL: +2.2 MEG: +1 <Able to last 60+ mins PIV>Comment
-
Have you actually checked that site? It's kind of pathetic, I mean people lose manhood points if someone is bigger than them and the points go to the bigger guy. It's a very arrogant and judgmental website and just because someone has a smaller dick, it doesn't make him less of a man. I didn't read the report but I'm assuming their "studied" average is based on the guys from their website. Most of the guys on there will be very confident and probably at least 7 inch but the guys who are smaller and more insecure won't post dick pics online so their average is completely flawed. I just signed up to see what it was about but I'm not even gonna waste my time, I'm not here to compare my size with others or be bigger than anyone else, I want to be bigger and improve sexual health for myself.Start: BPEL - 7.008", MEG - 5.197"
Current: BPEL - 7.126", MEG - 5.118"
Goal: BPEL - 9", MEG - 6.5"
Comment
-
Umm guys if the average on that site was 7" it would not follow the normal curve , it would be skewed . Now it took me 30 sec to realise that . Meaning no study was done dhuh it is a fabrication from beginning to end .
The only smart guy on this thread is CavalierComment
-
Originally posted by Pegasus View Post
HERE, HERE, FOR CAVALIER, AND PEG! GUYS BRAG ABOUT THEIR DICKS, NO MATTER WHAT THE SIZE.
READ A REPORT WITH A LARGE DATA BASE, WITH MORE SCIENTIFIC DATA--ACTUAL MEASURING--NO SELF REPORTING.
AND REMEMBER, GUYS, TO PLEASE YOUR PARTNER, ALL YOU NEED IS YOUR TONGUE.
Comment
-
Easy for you to say mr. 9.5 inches 😜Originally posted by going411by7 View Post
AND REMEMBER, GUYS, TO PLEASE YOUR PARTNER, ALL YOU NEED IS YOUR TONGUE.
Start 5.8 (14.9 cm) BPEL 5.2 MEG
Now: 7 .9 (20 cm ) BPEL 5.3 MEGComment
-
total bullshit.Comment
Tweet
Admin of the Month Mar 2015
Comment