Shane1

We're getting a few disapproving tweets. I'd like to ask for some direct feedback.

The tweets are mainly that we're objectifying women. Eg. "this is beyond commodity and into unitless essence. ratio is how we speak of % nitrogen in the air", "Treating potential partners as a commodity demeans them and encourages objectification."

Our intention here isn't to objectify women (or men). We've just noticed pretty skewed ratios here in SF, and were curious about starting to report them. We even started offering some insight/analysis based on SF Census numbers.

We asked a few of our friends. Many of them, both m and f, gave us really positive feedback.

We're not trying to treat people like numbers. But, if you're trying to meet someone, it might be relevant. Of course, meeting people in real life and connecting with them on a deeper level is still completely a human endeavor.

What do you think?

Arguable. Also, good number of girls have actually said they're extremely interested in these ratios too.

I can see the incentive for disinformation, especially for managers/employees of these venues. This problem can be solved with scale (one reported ratio completely different from the others is a red flag). Of course until we reach scale, we can't do that; but also, until we reach scale, there is not really incentive to misreport.

Very true. Providing incentive for people to contribute here is key. We're still brainstorming ideas and are looking for suggestions.

The reason we decided against scraping these other sites is that few people actually check-in. In a full bar, it'd be optimistic for >5 people to check in. This makes ratios very inaccurate. There actually is a site out there based on Foursquare check-ins and they suffer from this problem.

Yesterday, we and some friends walked around SF and counted at each bar & restaurant. We need help though so when you're out, tweet or DM us your venue, ratio, and how crowded it is. We'll be sure to tweet it.