The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

20 December 2005

Well, I (almost) never

How Slut-o-Meter works:

Slut-o-meter evaluates the promiscuity of the subject you enter by comparing the number of Google search results with and without "safe-search" enabled. A complete slut would return unsafe results and no safe results. Alternatively, a clean name should produce the same number of safe and unsafe results.

The exact formula is here. Applying it to the mysterious word "dustbury," we obtain promiscuity (as of this writing) of 5.42 percent.

(Via Majikthise, which scores 6.02 percent.)

Addendum, 22 December: Frank Wilson (book-review editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer) would like to know: "What can you make of something that rates Henry James sluttier than Tolstoy and Kerouac?" I figure it was transfixed by The Turn of the Screw.

Posted at 8:01 PM to Blogorrhea

TrackBack: 9:38 PM, 21 December 2005
» How Much of A Slut Are You? from Bill Peschel
Charles Hill of Dustbury found he rated a 5.42 percent on the Slut-o-Meter. By comparison, "sex" gets to third base at 50%, "Pamela Anderson" goes nearly all the way at ...[read more]

TrackBack: 10:06 PM, 21 December 2005
» I'm 5.08% Slutty from Dr. Weevil
So says the Slut-o-Meter (þ Dustbury). When I do the same calculation through Google myself, I get a figure of 1.49%. The arithmetic is quite simple: the sluttiness quotient is just the percentage of sites found using an unrestricted Google searc......[read more]

donnaville Promiscuity: 27.31% (6800 / 24900)

I am not surprised

Posted by: Donna at 8:10 PM on 20 December 2005

Oh dear. "My dog Gabe" has a promiscuity of 12.5 percent. That's a lot higher than even "Wonkette" (8.65). Should I be worried?

Posted by: Sean Gleeson at 8:33 PM on 20 December 2005

I'm sure Ana Marie can take up the slack.

Posted by: CGHill at 8:36 PM on 20 December 2005

Heh. You're sluttier than I am. 4.4%

Posted by: aldahlia at 8:38 PM on 20 December 2005


Man, I need to get out more.

Posted by: McGehee at 8:41 PM on 20 December 2005

I was a 7.87. I think any female name will generate big numbers. I ran a couple of friends through it and came up with absurdly high ratings; one of them justifies it and the other doesn't.

Posted by: Brett at 9:05 PM on 20 December 2005

Whoohooo...Don't muck with me! nobodyasked scores a 26.99%. Maybe Donna and I need to slut-around together...whatcha say, babe?

Posted by: Winston at 9:35 PM on 20 December 2005

My blog's name, "Play One on TV" topped 11%, which I'm sure is entirely due to Paris Hilton's influence (who nets an 84% all by her little, little lonesome). By contrast, my wife's name barely made 4%, certifying her as a Paris Hilton-free zone. Couldn't ask for more!

Posted by: Joe Goodwin at 10:00 PM on 20 December 2005

Good grief -- I hit 20%!

Posted by: david at 10:11 PM on 20 December 2005

Ahem... 89.4% for my full name.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Posted by: Dan (Lovejoy) at 1:16 AM on 21 December 2005

One-point-eight-three. Excuse me now, I must be off to give birth to the Messiah.

Posted by: Mr. Snitch! at 2:38 AM on 21 December 2005

Sorry, Mr. Snitch, I must BE the Messiah: 1.49%.

Posted by: Dr. Weevil at 8:50 AM on 21 December 2005


Posted by: Dwayne "the canoe guy" at 9:46 AM on 21 December 2005

Snitch, Weevil -- y'wanna borrow my National Geographic collection?

Posted by: McGehee at 9:47 AM on 21 December 2005

Oops, sorry -- Dwayne already took 'em.

Posted by: McGehee at 9:48 AM on 21 December 2005

The formula is incomplete. I'm sure we must enter the length of blogging into it somehow.
This way my boring 9.09% become increasingly fascinating when you consider I only have 5 or 6 posts on my LJournal so far.

Posted by: Tatyana at 12:57 PM on 21 December 2005

Interestingly, I've been getting a few hits from Wikipedia lately because someone quoted me under 'Clitoris'. (I pointed out that it was not discovered in the 16th century, as some ignorant people allege. The Greeks had a name for it, which was in fact 'kleitoris', so those 16th century anatomists didn't even claim to have discovered it themselves.) I wonder if those account for the 1.49%.

Posted by: Dr. Weevil at 9:53 PM on 21 December 2005


Posted by: Adam M Smith at 11:00 PM on 21 December 2005

Here's a 96.31 percent.

Posted by: CGHill at 11:53 AM on 22 December 2005

My blog got a rating of 56.68% promiscuous.

I checked and it got a rating of 96.44% promiscuous.

There MUST be a bug.

Posted by: Joseph Hertzlinger at 1:48 AM on 25 December 2005

More likely, it's all that horrid Teenwire stuff that Dawn links to.

Posted by: CGHill at 9:00 AM on 25 December 2005