Privacy
The number is stored even when the photo is not
Results, timestamps and per-axis numbers are kept as account data, and a history of them says things about a person that a single one does not.
Guides on Privacy: Who could see it, how, and what each path costs to close, Soft delete, backups, caches and logs, Sometimes, and the policy clause that says so is easy to miss
Yes, your score is data too: a tool can delete your photo the moment it is scored and still keep a record about you. The number, the per-axis breakdown, the timestamp and the account it was attached to all outlive the image unless a policy says otherwise.
Why the result outlives the photo
Deleting the source image is comparatively easy and increasingly common, because the image is the part everyone asks about. The result is different. It is small, it is useful for account features like history and trends, and nobody files a request asking a service to forget a number. So it tends to sit in the database long after the photo that produced it is gone, which is a separate question from what happens to the embedding once the pixels are deleted.
What a history of results discloses
One score tells you almost nothing on its own. A sequence of them, dated, tells you when someone was active, how often, and whether the numbers moved in a direction that matches some other event. That is the general shape of the problem with any longitudinal personal record: the pattern across entries carries more information than any single entry, even when every entry looks harmless in isolation. An account's result history is exactly that kind of record, sitting quietly next to whatever else the account holds.
What to check
A retention policy worth trusting says what happens to results independently of what it says about photos, because the two are different assets with different lifespans. Under UK and EU data protection law this is not optional: Article 5(1)(e) of the GDPR requires personal data to be kept "for no longer than necessary for the purposes for which the personal data are processed." The ICO's storage limitation guidance adds that organisations need "a policy setting standard retention periods wherever possible," which covers a score history as much as a photo. Look for a stated period after which results are purged, not just images, and whether closing an account removes the history or only the login. Rate Cock keeps a visible results history because that is the feature people want, which makes the retention question about that history worth asking directly rather than assuming it follows the photo.
Score history is the practical side of a question Measure My Cock's data section also has to answer, since a repeat measurement is exactly the kind of record that accumulates meaning over time. Reading a result history for what it can and cannot tell you is a related skill to reading a single result honestly, which Penis Rater covers from the day-to-day user's side. Whether a single result even counts as reportable data in the first place is its own question, and the answer does not depend on whether a face was in frame. Where a human judge is involved rather than a model, the record a commissioned review leaves behind is a related but separate retention question, since a person's written notes are a different kind of asset again. None of this requires assuming bad intent from a provider - it requires reading the policy for the sentence about results, which is often absent even when the sentence about photos is thorough, and asking what a deletion request actually reaches once you send one.