07-26-2013, 07:44 AM
Why not replace height at least with a scale number instead? I can't see updating the tables to be more "accurate" having as much of a payoff because then we'd have to edit a ton of profiles (unless we decided those profiles could be grandfathered in). At the same time height served a function so no one could say they were ridiculously huge or small.
Now if height was replaced with a model scale then it would be less subjective if they're "small" or "large" you can just say they're .98 or 1.03.
Now if height was replaced with a model scale then it would be less subjective if they're "small" or "large" you can just say they're .98 or 1.03.