Methodology
How we measure taste. v2.0 — March 2026
What Is Taste?
Taste is the invisible hand behind every choice you make in public. It's not about what you like — it's about how you like it, why you like it, and whether those choices form a coherent identity.
Taste has been the last unquantified human quality. We measure IQ, EQ, credit scores, follower counts, engagement rates — but nobody has tried to systematically evaluate the quality of someone's digital presence. Until now.
The 4 Levels of Taste
Taste operates on a hierarchy. Each level builds on the one below it. Our 6 dimensions are organized by which level of taste they primarily measure.
“I like this.” Raw personal response. Everyone has it. Not scored — it's the soil taste grows in.
“This is good, that isn't.” You can tell quality from garbage. You have an eye. Measured by Curation and Intentionality.
“This doesn't exist yet, but it should.” Taste becomes generative, not just selective. Measured by Originality and Conviction.
“I couldn't have made this any other way.” Work and person are inseparable. Measured by Identity and Self-Awareness.
The Six Dimensions
Curation
12.5%Level 2: SelectorCan you recognize quality outside yourself? What do your selections — shares, references, influences — reveal about your eye?
Intentionality
12.5%Level 2: SelectorAre your choices deliberate? Whether minimalist or maximalist — is there a mind behind the moves?
Originality
17.5%Level 3: CreatorDo they add something to the world that wasn't there before?
Conviction
17.5%Level 3: CreatorDo they trust their own perception before consensus validates it?
Identity
20%Level 4: IdentityCan you feel a specific, unmistakable person behind the work?
Self-Awareness
20%Level 4: IdentityDo they understand their own taste — what it is, where it comes from, and what its blind spots are?
Composite Score
The composite Taste Score is a level-weighted average. Identity and Self-Awareness weigh heaviest (20% each) because they represent the deepest expression of taste — taste as self. Level 3 dimensions (Originality, Conviction) carry 17.5% each, while Level 2 dimensions (Curation, Intentionality) carry 12.5% each.
| Score | Tier |
|---|---|
| 90.00–100.00 | Legendary |
| 80.00–89.99 | Exceptional |
| 70.00–79.99 | Tasteful |
| 60.00–69.99 | Developing |
| 50.00–59.99 | Mid |
| 40.00–49.99 | Basic |
| 30.00–39.99 | Struggling |
| 0.00–29.99 | Tasteless |
Data Collection
We collect data from up to four sources per evaluation:
- 01 Twitter/X — Up to 200 recent tweets, profile bio, engagement patterns, retweets vs originals
- 02 LinkedIn — Up to 30 posts, headline, experience
- 03 Website — Content, copy quality, what you choose to show
- 04 Web Research — Google search for articles, interviews, mentions
All data is publicly available. We only analyze what you've chosen to put into the world. Screenshots are captured as evidence.
The AI Judge
We use Claude (Anthropic) as the primary judge. Same input data will produce similar but not identical scores on re-evaluation (±5 points). This reflects the inherent subjectivity of taste — even human judges would show similar variance.
Every claim in the report must be verifiable from the scraped data. Retweets are clearly distinguished from original content. Job titles and roles are taken verbatim from profiles, never interpreted or invented.
Limitations
We're honest about what this is and isn't:
- • Single-point-in-time evaluation — taste evolves
- • English-language bias in text-based scoring
- • Western-centric aesthetic norms in some dimensions
- • AI judge is consistent but not objective
- • Text-heavy analysis — limited visual scoring currently
We don't claim to be objective — taste is inherently subjective. But we claim to be consistent, insightful, and useful.