The strategy your sub is based is finding HVM(High-Value Male).

You use the terms HVM(High-value male), LVM(Low-value male), NVM(No-value male).

There can only be 3 axes on which to judge men:

    1. Looks (How attractive is he, what clothes he wears, how he takes care of himself, etc.)
    1. Behaviour (How he treats you, his level of commitment to the relationship, how well he is in bed, his relationship with his family, adultery, etc.)
    1. Resources/status (How much money, how many assets he is willing to provide, his status, career prospects, etc.)

You have to specify which of these is more important. Which takes priority. If a guy is attractive but non-commital and sleeps around is he higher status than a guy who is moderately attractive but treats you well. And in evaluating men in your life on let's call it say HVMness(of like 1 to 10), what order would you put looks, behaviour, resources?

You keep saying most men are LVM, but given what I see from girls in my life, you only view attractive men as even in the running for HVM? And given most men are not attractive to women on looks alone, most guys are immediately out of the running.

TLDR; How do you define HVM exactly?