Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 04:53:14 pm
Take the test here, and tell us of your results. (http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
*Very expressed introvert
*Distinctively expressed intuitive personality
*Distinctively expressed thinking personality
*Moderately expressed judging personality
Post by: Jopax on February 25, 2011, 05:01:52 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also:
# slightly expressed introvert
# slightly expressed sensing personality
# moderately expressed thinking personality
# very expressed perceiving personality
:/
Post by: Cheeetar on February 25, 2011, 05:03:14 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
- Very expressed introvert
- Moderately expressed sensing personality
- Slightly expressed thinking personality
- Slightly expressed judging personality
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 05:04:40 pm
Right, some of the questions seemed to repeat or were very similar, anyways:There's a reason for that, that reason being tripping up people who try to falsify their results as to get more accurate test outcomes.
Post by: Cthulhu on February 25, 2011, 05:04:55 pm
Post by: Boksi on February 25, 2011, 05:06:24 pm
Spoiler: I'm an INTJ (click to show/hide)
Post by: inteuniso on February 25, 2011, 05:16:57 pm
Spoiler: ENTP! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dragooble on February 25, 2011, 05:17:43 pm
Spoiler: ISTP (click to show/hide)
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 05:23:42 pm
Spoiler: INXP (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2011, 05:26:14 pm
Spoiler: INTP (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2011, 05:29:11 pm
Post by: Darkwind3 on February 25, 2011, 05:32:25 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 25, 2011, 05:35:58 pm
Spoiler: INTP (click to show/hide)
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 05:37:22 pm
I don't mean to ruin everyone's fun, but this test and others like it are bullshit. You cannot- absolutely cannot- attempt to categorize an interconnected system with a hundred trillion elements and a googol of possible configurations into a set of predefined groups. Humans simply do not work that way.
Pseudoscience to the max.
Read up on it. It's actually pretty interesting. I feel this way about every other 'personality test' I've ever seen, but this one is nearly a century old with lots of research behind it. One of the links provided after you take the test even explains how the dichotomies combine to form your normal thought processes. Go check out personalitycafe.com, and compare similarities and differences between people on the different type forums. There is definitely something there.
Post by: Nivim on February 25, 2011, 05:47:35 pm
I don't mean to ruin everyone's fun, but this test and others like it are bullshit. You cannot- absolutely cannot- attempt to categorize an interconnected system with a hundred trillion elements and a googol of possible configurations into a set of predefined groups. Humans simply do not work that way.Which is exactly the problem that the psychologists this test is named after were attempting to tackle. Each one of the "profiles" is specifically general and does not claim to be a perfect fit, but instead an educated guess that the test taker might just find useful. I'm assuming you didn't fill out the test and research the groups? They're aren't nasty like stereotypes are.
Predit: 4 new replies. Oh, and if you want a quick-research these pages (http://typelogic.com/) are linked at the end of the test MSH linked. I don't think any of the other sites linked so far give a good description.
Edit: Added quote to remove discontinuity.
Post by: scriver on February 25, 2011, 06:10:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
- slightly expressed extravert
- moderately expressed intuitive personality
- slightly expressed thinking personality
- moderately expressed perceiving personality
Usually when I take this test I end up more introverted though, making me an Architect.
Post by: Retro on February 25, 2011, 06:11:20 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 06:11:56 pm
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on February 25, 2011, 06:19:07 pm
Architects are rare - maybe one percent of the population - and show the greatest precision in thought and speech of all the types. They tend to see distinctions and inconsistencies instantaneously, and can detect contradictions no matter when or where they were made. It is difficult for an Architect to listen to nonsense, even in a casual conversation, without pointing out the speaker's error. And in any serious discussion or debate Architects are devastating, their skill in framing arguments giving them an enormous advantage. Architects regard all discussions as a search for understanding, and believe their function is to eliminate inconsistencies, which can make communication with them an uncomfortable experience for many.
Also, INTP:
11 Introverted
50 Intuitive
1 Thinking
11 Perceiving
Post by: sonerohi on February 25, 2011, 06:21:47 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2011, 06:23:47 pm
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on February 25, 2011, 06:26:10 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 06:26:59 pm
Post by: Dragooble on February 25, 2011, 06:32:16 pm
Post by: scriver on February 25, 2011, 06:34:03 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2011, 06:36:46 pm
Quote
Ruthless pragmatists about ideas, and insatiably curious, Architects are driven to find the most efficient means to their ends, and they will learn in any manner and degree they can. They will listen to amateurs if their ideas are useful, and will ignore the experts if theirs are not. Authority derived from office, credential, or celebrity does not impress them. Architects are interested only in what make sense, and thus only statements that are consistent and coherent carry any weight with them. Architects often seem difficult to know. They are inclined to be shy except with close friends, and their reserve is difficult to penetrate.So far, so good.
Quote
Able to concentrate better than any other type,Bullcrap.
Quote
they prefer to work quietly at their computers or drafting tables, and often alone. Architects also become obsessed with analysis, and this can seem to shut others out. Once caught up in a thought process, Architects close off and persevere until they comprehend the issue in all its complexity. Architects prize intelligence, and with their grand desire to grasp the structure of the universe, they can seem arrogant and may show impatience with others who have less ability, or who are less driven.
Post by: fqllve on February 25, 2011, 06:41:44 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 25, 2011, 06:45:36 pm
Keep in mind, as Eugenitor said, people are complex, and you aren't going to fit any of the groups exactly.QuoteAble to concentrate better than any other type,Bullcrap.
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 06:50:17 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 06:51:47 pm
E - 11%
I - 75%
F - 25%
J - 33%
slightly expressed extravert
distinctively expressed intuitive personality
moderately expressed feeling personality
moderately expressed judging personality
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2011, 06:54:20 pm
Keep in mind, as Eugenitor said, people are complex, and you aren't going to fit any of the groups exactly.I know, I was jus' comparing it to myself.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 06:56:35 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 07:02:12 pm
Keep in mind, as Eugenitor said, people are complex, and you aren't going to fit any of the groups exactly.
Which is why it places you on a scale, rather than stating "You are X"
Post by: darkrider2 on February 25, 2011, 07:02:57 pm
Introverted: 67
Sensing:12
Thinking:62
Perceiving:33
Post by: Knirisk on February 25, 2011, 07:50:16 pm
Introverted: 78
Intuitive: 88
Thinking: 38
Judging: 1
Post by: Leafsnail on February 25, 2011, 08:01:01 pm
Intuitive: 50
Thinking: 12
Judging: 1
Half of the questions seemed kindof... difficult to answer. I mean, I don't think the scientific approach is always best, but if I say no, will it therefore assume I discard it?
A maybe option would've helped a lot.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 08:03:40 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 25, 2011, 08:15:18 pm
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 08:26:41 pm
Extraverted: 56
Intuitive: 88
Thinking: 1
Perceiving: 33
# moderately expressed extravert
# very expressed intuitive personality
# slightly expressed thinking personality
# moderately expressed perceiving personality
Making me an inventor, and I guess that is alright for a programmer. After all, creativity and logical design are both important in both scripting and inventing. Hey look, it even has a career advisor thingy, one of my jobs being "Information System Specialist", cool!
Post by: breadbocks on February 25, 2011, 08:36:58 pm
Post by: Pnx on February 25, 2011, 08:40:07 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's cute how it has me right on in the first two paragraphs except for the part about believing the world to be an ethical and honorable place, anyone that knows me knows I'm a huge cynic. It probably only catches me that much because of it's fairly broad and catch-all in it's language.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 08:41:54 pm
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 08:43:56 pm
Quote
ENTPs are usually verbally as well as cerebrally quick, and generally love to argue--both for its own sake, and to show off their often-impressive skills. They tend to have a perverse sense of humor as well, and enjoy playing devil's advocate. They sometimes confuse, even inadvertently hurt, those who don't understand or accept the concept of argument as a sport.
So that's why it is so hard to find a good debate, nobody else is smart enough to see the fun side of it! :P
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 25, 2011, 08:44:24 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
The one word that best describes Inspectors is superdependable.Yup, thats me, definately.
Post by: Pnx on February 25, 2011, 08:46:08 pm
See that's me as well, these things tend to have a lot of catch-all wording in them.QuoteENTPs are usually verbally as well as cerebrally quick, and generally love to argue--both for its own sake, and to show off their often-impressive skills. They tend to have a perverse sense of humor as well, and enjoy playing devil's advocate. They sometimes confuse, even inadvertently hurt, those who don't understand or accept the concept of argument as a sport.
Post by: Diablous on February 25, 2011, 08:59:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm with Leaf, I found some of the questions to be kinda difficult to answer with either a yes or a no. A "maybe" option would have been nice.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:02:28 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 25, 2011, 09:03:28 pm
Post by: Shinziril on February 25, 2011, 09:03:42 pm
Introverted 22%
Intuitive 12%
Thinking 62%
Judging 56%
Mastermind, huh. Interesting.
Especially interesting when compared with Diablous's INTJ. These values clearly have a bit of a range to them.
I wouldn't be surprised if the Myers-Briggs test was up to, oh, 40% bullshit or so, but that's certainly better than some of the other "personality tests" you can find on the Internet :P
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:05:18 pm
Yes, and I think that making people choose randomly for questions they can't sensibly answer damages the outcome of it.points you lost from one question can be accrued back from the other ones, if there was a answer to any feeling then this test would overload you.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 25, 2011, 09:06:50 pm
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 09:08:03 pm
points you lost from one question can be accrued back from the other ones, if there was a answer to any feeling then this test would overload you.
You conjure images in my mind of somebody being given a multiple choice question, with every possible answer ever given. The persons brain then explodes.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:11:43 pm
Yes, but it means you get random noise on top of that.look, do i look like i read the damn DSM every day?
Post by: Stas on February 25, 2011, 09:18:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I read that only 4% of the population is INTP and felt special. Then I noticed that 15 people on here are INTP. Then I realized that this is Bay12. Then everything made sense.
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2011, 09:19:24 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:20:11 pm
i see bell curve...
Post by: Stas on February 25, 2011, 09:20:34 pm
Yeah, everybody here is an architect or a borderline mastermind. Everybody who claims otherwise is a bloody liar.
Indeed.
Nice "Donjon de Naheulbeuk" avatar, by the way.
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 25, 2011, 09:21:30 pm
As for anybody that says it's using "catch-all" language, that's partially the Forer effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect) at work. The test is grouping almost 7 billion people into 16 categories, so what do you expect?
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 09:22:26 pm
Yeah, everybody here is an architect or a borderline mastermind. Everybody who claims otherwise is a bloody liar.
We are on the forums, a social network, is it that unrealistic to think some of us might me extroverts?
Post by: Stas on February 25, 2011, 09:26:02 pm
Yeah, everybody here is an architect or a borderline mastermind. Everybody who claims otherwise is a bloody liar.
We are on the forums, a social network, is it that unrealistic to think some of us might me extroverts?
HAH HAH!
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:27:04 pm
i am you asses, i rather talk to your faces than hide behind textYeah, everybody here is an architect or a borderline mastermind. Everybody who claims otherwise is a bloody liar.
We are on the forums, a social network, is it that unrealistic to think some of us might me extroverts?
HAH HAH!
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 25, 2011, 09:28:57 pm
The Myers-Briggs test stems from work around a century ago, and is based upon the observations of psychologists all throughout that time. Astrology is based on a bunch of bullshit.See that's me as well, these things tend to have a lot of catch-all wording in them.
As do horoscopes.
I mean if I really wanted to, I could sit down and make up a whole bunch of questions and make general assessments based on those questions. But that doesn't give it any intrinsic validity.
Just the fact that it fits neatly on a grid system should be the first clue that something's wrong.
And being based on a grid system is completely irrelevant. Of course it fits on a grid system, there's 4 traits, and two possibilities for each. The only other option is a four-dimensional graph :P
Post by: Stas on February 25, 2011, 09:29:16 pm
i am you asses, i rather talk to your faces than hide behind textYeah, everybody here is an architect or a borderline mastermind. Everybody who claims otherwise is a bloody liar.
We are on the forums, a social network, is it that unrealistic to think some of us might me extroverts?
HAH HAH!
Cam2Cam baby?
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:30:19 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 09:33:30 pm
But have a look at some of the different archetypes in Myers-Briggs. I guarantee that not a single one will succeed at describing you 100%. You will disagree with some tidbits or feel like there's something missing. But I also guarantee that there will only be a couple archetypes that do a decent job of describing you when taken as a whole.
For instance, I'm strongly INP, but very weakly F. So architect and healer both describe me equally well. However, those are the only two that do a really good job describing me. There are tidbits from others that I might agree with, but that's because this all works on a spectrum. I'm not 100% on anything, so there are small parts of me that just aren't very dominant that will be caught by bits and pieces across the archetypes. However, when I read the pages for either ESJ type, it pretty well describes my exact opposite. My wife, coincidentally, is an ESFJ, and she really is my exact opposite in all aspects of our personalities.
I find it interesting that INFPs have a decent presence on Bay12. Like INTPs, they're also a very small percentage of the population. And it's easier to understand why INTPs would be drawn here. Not so easy for INFPs.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 09:36:30 pm
Post by: Stas on February 25, 2011, 09:38:21 pm
This thread is quickly becoming too sexy for its shirt. Probably because threads don't fucking wear shirts.
Sigged.
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 25, 2011, 09:41:48 pm
This thread is quickly becoming too sexy for its shirt. Probably because threads don't fucking wear shirts.I read this wrong and started wondering how it would be possible for you get too sexy for a fucking shirt.
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 25, 2011, 09:47:34 pm
The whole "hundred years" thing doesn't help at all. A hundred years ago girls used their lips to smooth out brushes for radioactive paint.About a hundred years ago, Einstein was setting the foundations for his theory of relativity. Don't try saying that people a hundred years ago didn't know anything. Radioactive paint is completely irrelevant.
It's "What Pokemon are you" with more window dressing.
If you really must continue, why not find yourself on this (http://www.xeromag.com/fun/personality.html) list instead?
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 09:48:46 pm
The whole "hundred years" thing doesn't help at all. A hundred years ago girls used their lips to smooth out brushes for radioactive paint.
Have you heard of Carl Jung?
Also, this is used professionally by therapists, and business management. I had to study this thing on three separate occassions in college -- once in a psychology class, once briefly in a class on buddhism, and again in a project management class. I know the types of all of the managers in my office, because they had to take a more sophisticated version of the test as part of their management training and team building exercises. All except two of them are ESTJ's :(
Post by: Heliman on February 25, 2011, 09:49:28 pm
EDIT: ENTJ, after actually taking the damn test.
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 09:51:31 pm
The whole "hundred years" thing doesn't help at all. A hundred years ago girls used their lips to smooth out brushes for radioactive paint.
It's "What Pokemon are you" with more window dressing.
If you really must continue, why not find yourself on this (http://www.xeromag.com/fun/personality.html) list instead?
You know I fail to see where your comming from with this. It is a test designed to find out how far along you are in four specific personality traits. These specific traits exist over a spectrum with opposed values at either end. By answering these questions, it can be calculated how far along this spectrum you are. Then from observation of people with common values, we can figure out how these values interact and make a guess as to how a specific person might act. Yes, it is a catch all, and yes, it dosn't take everything into account. Being male or female dosn't take a lot into account, such as your prefered colour, but I can still seperate people by gender.
If you wanted to fight against the validity of this test, you should be pointing out that what people think they are, and what people realy are, are not always the same thing.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 09:51:53 pm
If you really must continue, why not find yourself on this (http://www.xeromag.com/fun/personality.html) list instead?CHALLENGE ACCEPTED
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:53:05 pm
lol
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 09:53:12 pm
Better grab the tinfoil hat so the gubmint can't steal my BRAINWAVES!!!!1
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 09:55:11 pm
Oh, I'm the only Conspiracy Theorist here. Gosh darn it.JOIN ME MY FELLOW BROTHER AND WE SHALL DESTROY THIS EVIL
Better grab the tinfoil hat so the gubmint can't steal my BRAINWAVES!!!!1
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 10:00:58 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 25, 2011, 10:02:31 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 25, 2011, 10:04:08 pm
I tell you man, it's all a hoax! The Tea Party's trying to stop me enjoying my hot beverages, the Goverment wants my Brainwaves and all the Foreigners are out to steal my bedcovers! It's so obvious! Wake up sheeple!Hmmm...
Weaponization of Brainwaves...
Now there's an idea....
Gladice! Call up my regulars and ask them if they'd be interested in a Brainwave Ray!
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 25, 2011, 10:12:31 pm
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 10:15:15 pm
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 10:18:22 pm
You can't see my thoughts! My tin foil hat protects me!Mad scientist invents tin foil seeking missle.
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 10:20:27 pm
Post by: woose1 on February 25, 2011, 10:22:43 pm
Really? Me? I didn't know I was such a bastard. :P
EDIT: More disturbing was that one of the jobs they recommended me for was an 'anesthesiologist'. One of my prime goals in life, actually.
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 10:32:04 pm
You're in league with the government and the aliens! Luckily, I have a secret underground bunker for just this eventuality! So long, suckers!
Fuck, I hate it when they go into the bunkers.
Alright, fire up the giant robot mole. Looks like were going to be playing motherload tonight.
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 10:35:25 pm
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 10:40:12 pm
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 25, 2011, 10:45:43 pm
Post by: Zrk2 on February 25, 2011, 10:47:46 pm
Introverted: 78%
Intuitive: 25%
Thinking: 100%
Judging: 78%
I'm the mastermind, outside contractor, I sound like a badass.
Post by: woose1 on February 25, 2011, 10:48:37 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 25, 2011, 10:49:55 pm
I got thinking 1%. :Pwell we now understand now but do you? XD
Post by: Zrk2 on February 25, 2011, 11:16:38 pm
I got thinking 1%. :Pwell we now understand now but do you? XD
I understood that before you posted it.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 25, 2011, 11:21:18 pm
Therefore, you are guilty of thought-crime and will now turn yourself in.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 25, 2011, 11:22:11 pm
I got ISTJ with
67% introverted
1% sensing
1% thinking
11% judging
Post by: Max White on February 25, 2011, 11:24:41 pm
Are the percentages suppose to be so low?
I got ISTJ with
67% introverted
1% sensing
1% thinking
11% judging
They are not 'low' per say. Getting into the negitives inplys your positive in the opposite attribute. So getting low numbers shows border line numbers. Take sensing for example, had you gotten 2 percent less, you would be 1% in what ever is opposit it.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 11:32:23 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on February 25, 2011, 11:35:14 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm not sure why I got thinking 1% since most of my answers on the think about your actions and/or the situation vs. don't do so and go with the flow were absolutely the latter.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2011, 11:42:03 pm
I guess I'm an evil mastermind, which means I will some day control all of you as my brain slaves, and then based on my answers get bored of that and go take a sixteen day walk instead.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm not sure why I got thinking 1% since most of my answers on the think about your actions and/or the situation vs. don't do so and go with the flow were absolutely the latter.
Thinking/Feeling are a little strange in the Myers-Briggs context. I think they're meant to indicate whether you process information within a more objective or relative framework, not necessarily whether you are more logical vs emotional. Going with the flow actually has more to do with N and P.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 12:03:15 am
The Extroverted part is really variable given that my entire attitude towards other people change given how social I'm being at any given moment.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 12:20:35 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 12:29:48 am
Post by: Derekristow on February 26, 2011, 01:01:01 am
Spoiler: INTJ (click to show/hide)
I had heard of this test before, but I hadn't found a site to actually take it at.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 01:01:38 am
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 01:07:21 am
whats with you people living in a shell?
What do you mean?
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 01:08:28 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 01:09:50 am
Post by: Gunner-Chan on February 26, 2011, 01:14:08 am
Post by: Heliman on February 26, 2011, 01:29:26 am
I <3 crouds. They are fun, like swimming through a school of fish, a single entity formed from many small parts will dynamicly move around you, all while yu are part of it. Beautiful.and that's why he's a republican (snark-snark wink-wink nudge-nudge.)
Seriously though, we're talking about a collective community nerdy enough to play DF here, introversion is assumed until stated otherwise.
Post by: Zrk2 on February 26, 2011, 01:31:06 am
whats with you people living in a shell?
Because if I spend time with other people I have to deal with the shallowness, the stupidity, the sheer laziness, the idiocy and the sheer banality of modern culture. In general,
People are Stupid. -Zrk2s' Razor
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 01:34:54 am
Basically.
Post by: Zrk2 on February 26, 2011, 01:37:43 am
(Lots of time spent with people -> not much time spent by myself, thinking -> nothing worthwhile to say to anyone -> useless.) < Math
Basically.
Fixed.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 01:40:19 am
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 01:46:23 am
Yea, I can understand why introvert is the default here, but it isn't a rule.I <3 crouds. They are fun, like swimming through a school of fish, a single entity formed from many small parts will dynamicly move around you, all while yu are part of it. Beautiful.and that's why he's a republican (snark-snark wink-wink nudge-nudge.)
Seriously though, we're talking about a collective community nerdy enough to play DF here, introversion is assumed until stated otherwise.
Also, Australian, so I couldn't be republican if I wanted to be, and I vote greens. Do republicans like crounds? Or fish, for that matter?
Post by: Heron TSG on February 26, 2011, 01:47:24 am
Post by: Zrk2 on February 26, 2011, 01:52:56 am
Last I recall, I was INTJ. I need to take the test again for any actual results, though. I've changed a lot in the past few months.
From what I understand you are a lot like me so, probably INTJ.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 02:01:35 am
Post by: Zrk2 on February 26, 2011, 02:03:25 am
Post by: Solifuge on February 26, 2011, 02:08:13 am
Spoiler: INFP (click to show/hide)
You are a:
* moderately expressed introvert
* moderately expressed intuitive personality
* moderately expressed feeling personality
* distinctively expressed perceiving personality
Anyway, typology BS or no, it's interesting to see the tendencies in the traits of people this forum attracts. Lots of masterminds and eggheads, so it would seem.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 03:00:06 am
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 03:28:28 am
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 03:31:16 am
Post by: Mindmaker on February 26, 2011, 05:54:45 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You are:
* very expressed introvert
* moderately expressed intuitive personality
* slightly expressed feeling personality
* slightly expressed judging personality
Description is quite matching, atlough I believe that could have been said about some of the others.
However this would reinforce my current favorite among my future major subjects.
Post by: Christes on February 26, 2011, 06:42:48 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
As soon as I saw this thread, I (correctly) guessed what the results would be for the forum. :P
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 26, 2011, 06:47:19 am
So, you wanna see my secret under ground anti-government bunker?
/me raises his eyebrows suggestively.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:56:30 am
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 06:57:47 am
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:11:05 am
I got ISFP. I guess it fits...You're the Composer? Well f*ck. at least you're better than Joshua.
Post by: Miggy on February 26, 2011, 07:15:15 am
I'm ENTJ:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
You are:
* moderately expressed extravert
* moderately expressed intuitive personality
* slightly expressed thinking personality
* moderately expressed judging personality
I tried to look up what exactly a field marshal personality type is, and I found it... curious. A lot of points certainly seemed to fit me, but it seems weird to be labeled as a natural leader. I mean, I like being in a position of control and/or authority, and I definitely want to seek out a career as a high-ranking *something*, but it's odd to have it tell that to me. :o
Post by: RedKing on February 26, 2011, 10:55:46 am
ALWAYS.
Post by: Gorjo MacGrymm on February 26, 2011, 10:58:41 am
its dead wrong. LOL
I cant stand anything that its says I am supposd to love. (music texture color aroma - so not me - I am blind to most of that - except listening to music).
Post by: Simmura McCrea on February 26, 2011, 11:42:36 am
You are:
very expressed introvert
slightly expressed sensing personality
distinctively expressed thinking personality
slightly expressed perceiving personality
Yep, sounds about right. Now what's all this ISFP INFP etc. stuff?
Post by: eerr on February 26, 2011, 12:13:57 pm
intp
(lost the main page I was on)
So apparently I am (personally?) most like
Isaac Newton, Niels Bohr, C. G. Jung, Michel de Montaigne, Michel Nostradamus, Ada Lovelace
On Wikiing Montaigne, he thinks everything I do, to the letter, and he wrote it down.
God damn.
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on February 26, 2011, 12:41:02 pm
Post by: Zrk2 on February 26, 2011, 01:33:34 pm
First time I took it I got INTJ, with something like 33, 11, 30+, 1, on taking it again, I got ISTJ with 22, 12, 25, 1. And that's answering as much the same as I could. Perhaps this 72 question yes/no test isn't actually a reliable gauge? ::)
LIES!!! THIS GAUGE IS GOD!!! HOE DARE YOU QUESTION?!?!?!
...But, yeah, probably.
Post by: Euld on February 26, 2011, 01:50:00 pm
Post by: Shinziril on February 26, 2011, 01:53:59 pm
Post by: Mindmaker on February 26, 2011, 02:07:03 pm
Brilliant! Finally another conspiracy theorist!
I don't even understand why it is called that way...
Post by: GTM on February 26, 2011, 02:07:40 pm
Consider the following:
- it's culturally biased
- the strong wording of the questions eliminates nuance - a question like "I always like to plan ahead" is a joke. Sure, you're going to plan ahead to buy a good lock for your front door and install it properly, but almost nobody plans how many seconds they're going to take to drink a can of pepsi unless they're OCD
- countless experiments show that people respond similarly to many stimuli regardless of personality
- there's an element of feedback loop and self-fulfilled prophecy. If you think "I'm an introvert" you're more likely to remain an introvert
- there are a million variables that influence how you'll handle the situation
-try taking the test sober, tired, drunk, after skydiving, stoned, tripping, after being dumped - see if you get the same responses
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on February 26, 2011, 02:11:00 pm
I've heard your results can change over time. People change over time after all. I've taken this test twice, first time was a few years ago and again recently, and although the results were different it pegged me pretty well both times.I took it last night, and again this morning because I had forgotten to post and lost the tab with the results. The results swung by ~10-20 points, with the exception of the last one, when I was actively trying to answer the same as I had last night... :-\
I used to score INTP, with much more pronounced scores on all of them. I've also seen much longer tests, with a scale rather than simple yes/no responses.
Post by: eerr on February 26, 2011, 02:20:49 pm
These tests are a load of crap. Whoever said it's just a glorified "which pokemon are you" was right on the money.
Consider the following:
- it's culturally biased
- the strong wording of the questions eliminates nuance - a question like "I always like to plan ahead" is a joke. Sure, you're going to plan ahead to buy a good lock for your front door and install it properly, but almost nobody plans how many seconds they're going to take to drink a can of pepsi unless they're OCD
- countless experiments show that people respond similarly to many stimuli regardless of personality
- there's an element of feedback loop and self-fulfilled prophecy. If you think "I'm an introvert" you're more likely to remain an introvert
- there are a million variables that influence how you'll handle the situation
-try taking the test sober, tired, drunk, after skydiving, stoned, tripping, after being dumped - see if you get the same responses
Oh? My results led me to a wikipedia article of a man who thinks exactly the same as I do.
IDENTICALLY. You just don't get that sort of organization from bullshit.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 02:23:15 pm
These tests are a load of crap. Whoever said it's just a glorified "which pokemon are you" was right on the money.It is rather flawed, yes, but it is not entirely useless.
Consider the following:
- it's culturally biased
- the strong wording of the questions eliminates nuance - a question like "I always like to plan ahead" is a joke. Sure, you're going to plan ahead to buy a good lock for your front door and install it properly, but almost nobody plans how many seconds they're going to take to drink a can of pepsi unless they're OCD
- countless experiments show that people respond similarly to many stimuli regardless of personality
- there's an element of feedback loop and self-fulfilled prophecy. If you think "I'm an introvert" you're more likely to remain an introvert
- there are a million variables that influence how you'll handle the situation
-try taking the test sober, tired, drunk, after skydiving, stoned, tripping, after being dumped - see if you get the same responses
Post by: scriver on February 26, 2011, 02:37:51 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 02:41:04 pm
These tests are a load of crap. Whoever said it's just a glorified "which pokemon are you" was right on the money.God what is with you people, if i give you guys the real IQ tests would you do it? (it lasts 3 hours)
Consider the following:
- it's culturally biased
- the strong wording of the questions eliminates nuance - a question like "I always like to plan ahead" is a joke. Sure, you're going to plan ahead to buy a good lock for your front door and install it properly, but almost nobody plans how many seconds they're going to take to drink a can of pepsi unless they're OCD
- countless experiments show that people respond similarly to many stimuli regardless of personality
- there's an element of feedback loop and self-fulfilled prophecy. If you think "I'm an introvert" you're more likely to remain an introvert
- there are a million variables that influence how you'll handle the situation
-try taking the test sober, tired, drunk, after skydiving, stoned, tripping, after being dumped - see if you get the same responses
Tests are always never perfect, we have adjust these everytime as time flies. You can't appeal to everybody and this isn't a complex test either just a simple personality. You want a second opinion? GO see a Shrink.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 02:54:27 pm
Post by: Zrk2 on February 26, 2011, 02:58:28 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 03:26:10 pm
God what is with you people, if i give you guys the real IQ tests would you do it? (it lasts 3 hours)No. Way. The last time I did it I was bored out of my mind, and the results were probably wrong too.
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 26, 2011, 05:13:30 pm
These tests are a load of crap. Whoever said it's just a glorified "which pokemon are you" was right on the money.Once again, this test has been developed over around a hundred years by hundreds, if not thousands, of psychologists. Who are you to just come along and say it's all wrong? This test is grouping almost 7 billion people into SIXTEEN categories, what gives you the idea it's going to be 100% accurate at all? Psychology is inherently pseudoscience. There is NOTHING that can change that. The brain and conscience is probably the only truly chaotic system in the entire universe. We can't predict what it will do. This test is as good as we're going to get because it's been researched and developed for so long. A "which Pokemon are you" test was probably thought up in fifteen minutes.
Consider the following:
- it's culturally biased
- the strong wording of the questions eliminates nuance - a question like "I always like to plan ahead" is a joke. Sure, you're going to plan ahead to buy a good lock for your front door and install it properly, but almost nobody plans how many seconds they're going to take to drink a can of pepsi unless they're OCD
- countless experiments show that people respond similarly to many stimuli regardless of personality
- there's an element of feedback loop and self-fulfilled prophecy. If you think "I'm an introvert" you're more likely to remain an introvert
- there are a million variables that influence how you'll handle the situation
-try taking the test sober, tired, drunk, after skydiving, stoned, tripping, after being dumped - see if you get the same responses
Also, these tests are based off of what you USUALLY do. Who's really going to think a question of whether they always plan ahead or not completely literal? And being sober, tired, stoned, whatever, those all change your personality and/or perception temporarily. They affect ANY test you take.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 05:25:57 pm
Although I'd say this is less "What pokemon are you" and more horoscope like.
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 05:28:20 pm
Post by: GTM on February 26, 2011, 05:30:21 pm
Quote
Once again, this test has been developed over around a hundred years by hundreds, if not thousands, of psychologists. Who are you to just come along and say it's all wrong?
Actually it was developed almost a hundred years ago by a poli sci major and her mom based on things they'd read in Jung's writings. The US national academy of sciences wrote a critique of it decades later that called out flaws in its validity and reliability. There have been other studies poking holes in myers-Briggs for years, too.
Myers-Briggs is pop psychology that's far more popular in business consulting and entrenched organizational wisdom than in actual academic psychology.
That said, it's a fun thing for people to do online, but it's really not far removed from horoscopes or personality quizzes. And if you think about it, it's a good opportunity for self-reflection, which isn't a bad thing.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 05:50:50 pm
I'm pretty sure it's a bit more than pop psychology, also. I've known at least two people whose professional therapists have made use of it to develop life advice and training for them. The online test linked in this thread is pretty simplistic, yeah, but there are more sophisticated assessments in use that aren't just multiple choice questionnaires.
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 26, 2011, 05:57:27 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 06:03:34 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:05:21 pm
Once again, this test has been developed over around a hundred years by hundreds, if not thousands, of psychologists. Who are you to just come along and say it's all wrong? This test is grouping almost 7 billion people into SIXTEEN categories, what gives you the idea it's going to be 100% accurate at all? Psychology is inherently pseudoscience. There is NOTHING that can change that. The brain and conscience is probably the only truly chaotic system in the entire universe. We can't predict what it will do. This test is as good as we're going to get because it's been researched and developed for so long. A "which Pokemon are you" test was probably thought up in fifteen minutes.
Also, these tests are based off of what you USUALLY do. Who's really going to think a question of whether they always plan ahead or not completely literal? And being sober, tired, stoned, whatever, those all change your personality and/or perception temporarily. They affect ANY test you take.
Now I do no question the method that these tests use. If you say you like to plan ahead, that means you the kind of person that likes to plan ahead, and we can all one to the tally board for the planing ahead trait. The logic is seemless. It describes back the person you described in these tests.
However, I do question how valid it is. How does it take into account the fact that people are not oftern who they think they are? I'm sure there are some people out there who would like to think they are highly social and do there best to get out at every chance, but in truth they are a lot more shy then they think, and are your typical intravert. The fact that you do not have an outside perspective on this makes is some what bias towards something you wish you were, rather then something you are.
I think getting constantly very high percentages should be a good clue to this. Even the most social butterfly enjoys some time alone sometimes, and the only people who should be getting 100% in anything are fictional characters with no depth.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 06:09:27 pm
Really? Are there serious psychologists who use quizzes on the internet developed by people without expertise?
No. This internet quiz is not the sole product of the entire myers-briggs concept.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 06:12:29 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 26, 2011, 06:14:31 pm
The question of whether people are who they think they are is not a problem in this test. People like to lie to themselves, that's going to be a problem no matter what test you throw at them. People have desires, and will try to test their wanted personality, instead of the one they have.Once again, this test has been developed over around a hundred years by hundreds, if not thousands, of psychologists. Who are you to just come along and say it's all wrong? This test is grouping almost 7 billion people into SIXTEEN categories, what gives you the idea it's going to be 100% accurate at all? Psychology is inherently pseudoscience. There is NOTHING that can change that. The brain and conscience is probably the only truly chaotic system in the entire universe. We can't predict what it will do. This test is as good as we're going to get because it's been researched and developed for so long. A "which Pokemon are you" test was probably thought up in fifteen minutes.
Also, these tests are based off of what you USUALLY do. Who's really going to think a question of whether they always plan ahead or not completely literal? And being sober, tired, stoned, whatever, those all change your personality and/or perception temporarily. They affect ANY test you take.
Now I do no question the method that these tests use. If you say you like to plan ahead, that means you the kind of person that likes to plan ahead, and we can all one to the tally board for the planing ahead trait. The logic is seemless. It describes back the person you described in these tests.
However, I do question how valid it is. How does it take into account the fact that people are not oftern who they think they are? I'm sure there are some people out there who would like to think they are highly social and do there best to get out at every chance, but in truth they are a lot more shy then they think, and are your typical intravert. The fact that you do not have an outside perspective on this makes is some what bias towards something you wish you were, rather then something you are.
I think getting constantly very high percentages should be a good clue to this. Even the most social butterfly enjoys some time alone sometimes, and the only people who should be getting 100% in anything are fictional characters with no depth.
Obviously, but I don't see why that means I can't criticise the test.There is a difference between the test and the questions. Your random quiz on the internet is going to have different (and less) questions from an actual "serious" test.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 06:15:05 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 06:17:12 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:18:17 pm
The question of whether people are who they think they are is not a problem in this test. People like to lie to themselves, that's going to be a problem no matter what test you throw at them. People have desires, and will try to test their wanted personality, instead of the one they have.
While people have a desire to know what personality type they realy have, it isn't that hard for somebody to convince themselves that the personality they describe is theirs, therefor satistfying there desire to seek the truth, because as far as they can see, it is the truth, and the desire to be a specific way, because this test told them what they wanted to hear.
I mean if you got a close freind to do the test for you, wouldn't that show a more valid figure?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 06:25:16 pm
Spoiler: Here are the old results. (click to show/hide)
Now, it's time to see where in hell you'll be suffering forever. (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv) The test has a ten minute time limit, so don't dally!
Spoiler: :D (click to show/hide)
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 06:26:49 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:29:05 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 06:30:24 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:31:26 pm
Well it's kinda ridiculous.
Anyways, Dis for me. Lots of "No"s and "False"s for me there.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 06:31:31 pm
are we done here?
Oh my. 7th level gooooooo!!!!!!!you know that should have been expect ;D
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:33:12 pm
Edit: ah, now it's working.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 06:33:53 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:36:01 pm
Eigth Level of Hell - the Malebolge
Many and varied sinners suffer eternally in the multi-leveled Malebolge, an ampitheatre-shapped pit of despair Wholly of stone and of an iron colour: Those guilty of fraudulence and malice; the seducers and pimps, who are whipped by horned demons; the hypocrites, who struggle to walk in lead-lined cloaks; the barraters, who are ducked in boiling pitch by demons known as the Malebranche. The simonists, wedged into stone holes, and whose feet are licked by flames, kick and writhe desperately. The magicians, diviners, fortune tellers, and panderers are all here, as are the thieves. Some wallow in human excrement. Serpents writhe and wrap around men, sometimes fusing into each other. Bodies are torn apart. When you arrive, you will want to put your hands over your ears because of the lamentations of the sinners here, who are afflicted with scabs like leprosy, and lay sick on the ground, furiously scratching their skin off with their nails. Indeed, justice divine doth smite them with its hammer.
Level 1 - Moderate
Level 2 - High
Level 3 - Low
Level 4 - Low
Level 5 - Low
Level 6 - Very High
Level 7 - Moderate
Level 8 - Very High
Level 9 - Moderate
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 06:38:39 pm
Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad.
Purgatory Moderate
Level 1 Very High
Level 2 Very Low
Level 3 Low
Level 4 Very Low
Level 5 High
Level 6 Moderate
Level 7 Low
Level 8 Low
Level 9 Low
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 06:39:10 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | High
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis | High
Level 7 | High
Level 8- the Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Moderate
Funny that I was rated highly lustful and violent, considering I've never intentionally harmed another person in my life and have never so much as kissed anyone other than my wife... but I guess this is still possible through fundamental religious thinking :P
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:40:09 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 26, 2011, 06:40:43 pm
I remember reading Dante's Inferno. Never got a chance to finish it, but it was an interesting read. I like how Dante put a place aside for the "Virtuous Pagans" (as he said in the book). Makes for a nice change from the "all non-believers shall burn!" attitude :P
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 06:41:00 pm
Can we do the Forer Test (http://forer.netopti.net/) next?
Spoiler: TAI (click to show/hide)
Post by: Diablous on February 26, 2011, 06:41:48 pm
You are one of the lucky ones! Because of your virtue and beliefs, you have escaped eternal punishment. You are sent to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
First Level of Hell - Limbo
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad.
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
(Click on a level for more info)
Level Who are sent there? Score
Purgatory Repenting Believers Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers High
Level 2 Lustful Moderate
Level 3 Gluttonous High
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Very Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Very Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Very Low
Level 7 Violent Low
Level 8- the Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Very Low
So, I'm a virtuous nonbeliever. Could be worse.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 06:42:03 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Incidentally, I feel Limbo is a horrifically cruel teaching, but eh.
@ToonyMan: Heh.
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 06:42:14 pm
You approach Satan's wretched city where you behold a wide plain surrounded by iron walls. Before you are fields full of distress and torment terrible. Burning tombs are littered about the landscape. Inside these flaming sepulchers suffer the heretics, failing to believe in God and the afterlife, who make themselves audible by doleful sighs. You will join the wicked that lie here, and will be offered no respite. The three infernal Furies stained with blood, with limbs of women and hair of serpents, dwell in this circle of Hell.
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
(Click on a level for more info)
Level Who are sent there? Score
Purgatory Repenting Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Very High
Level 2 Lustful Very Low
Level 3 Gluttonous Moderate
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy High
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Very High
Level 7 Violent Moderate
Level 8- the Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Low
What the hell (Pun ALWAYS intended) is the difference between virtuous non-believers and heretics?
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 06:43:41 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 06:44:38 pm
Virtuous Non-Believer. Huh.To be fair, Dante was somewhat unorthodox. He put the Pope in a very low level of hell, and added a clause that made it so his political enemies would have had their souls replaced by demons while they were still alive.
I remember reading Dante's Inferno. Never got a chance to finish it, but it was an interesting read. I like how Dante put a place aside for the "Virtuous Pagans" (as he said in the book). Makes for a nice change from the "all non-believers shall burn!" attitude :P
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:45:17 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:45:36 pm
So Max, shall we swap sins? If you know what I mean.
You only live once!
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 06:46:24 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 06:47:41 pm
/me damns this thread to Level 2 of Human Hell.So Max, shall we swap sins? If you know what I mean.
You only live once!
Post by: x2yzh9 on February 26, 2011, 06:47:47 pm
*Slightly expressed extravert
*Moderately expressed intuitive personality
*Moderately expressed thinking personality
*Slightly expressed judging personality
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:48:00 pm
nice to know i get to watch you heathens suffer :P
Well, I do beleive you are taking pleasure in the suffering of others. Welcome to the land of the gloomy and wraithful, Bi-artch!
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 06:48:26 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very High
Level 1 - Limbo | High
Level 2 | Low
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Moderate
Level 5 | Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very Low
Level 7 | Low
Level 8- the Malebolge | Low
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very Low
Curious. I wasn't expecting that result at all.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 06:48:39 pm
nice to know i get to watch you heathens suffer :PDon't make me go down!
OH MAX, RAVAGE ME IN A Non-sexual CONTEXT.So Max, shall we swap sins? If you know what I mean.
You only live once!
Post by: Darkwind3 on February 26, 2011, 06:49:04 pm
Level 1 Moderate
Level 2 High
Level 3 Low
Level 4 Low
Level 5 Low
Level 6 Very High
Level 7 Low
Level 8 Moderate
Level 9 High
So I'm lustful, heretical and treacherous. Well.
not-an-edit: Warning - while you were typing 5 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Warning - while you were typing 2 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 06:50:17 pm
[/me also damns this thread to Level 9 of Human Hell.OH MAX, RAVAGE ME IN A Non-sexual CONTEXT.So Max, shall we swap sins? If you know what I mean.
You only live once!
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 06:50:42 pm
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 06:50:52 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:51:04 pm
OH MAX, RAVAGE ME IN A Non-sexual CONTEXT.So Max, shall we swap sins? If you know what I mean.
You only live once!
Oh Ochita, your sins are so BIG, and predominate. I'm surprised you have the dignity to even stand up straight!
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 26, 2011, 06:51:14 pm
Spoiler: Sixth level for me! (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:51:29 pm
Edit: Huzzah for extreme heretic buddies!
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 06:52:09 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 06:52:21 pm
Vector, you are the God-empress of these fora. You don't get damned. At all.kickass im not alone XD
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 06:52:45 pm
They need to be better about their definitions or they're going to be in trouble some day.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 06:53:25 pm
Quote
Level 9/Cocytus- Treacherous
- 1 (7.1%)
God dam it! Ok, who was worse then me? Somebody out there managed to get even higher on the scale then mine...
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:53:54 pm
holy crap zerg, you're a terrible person :PI'm worse. Less lustful and avaricious and more violent and treasonous.
Although that test should take into account people that have their violent tendencies under control :/
Dun worry, 'twas probably just a lie.QuoteLevel 9/Cocytus- Treacherous
- 1 (7.1%)
God dam it! Ok, who was worse then me? Somebody out there managed to get even higher on the scale then mine...
Post by: Heron TSG on February 26, 2011, 06:54:58 pm
I vote that the next one we do is a 'What Pokemon are You' test.
Warning - while you were typing 31 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
DAMN IT.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 06:54:58 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:55:51 pm
I vote that the next one we do is a 'What Pokemon are You' test.Hell ya!
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 06:56:04 pm
Although that test should take into account people that have their violent tendencies under control :/
It's your soul that's being judged, not what you do with it!
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 06:56:53 pm
Post by: scriver on February 26, 2011, 06:57:10 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 06:58:05 pm
Don't worry Max, lets insert our sins together to become... THE 10TH LEVEL OF HELL.QuoteLevel 9/Cocytus- Treacherous
- 1 (7.1%)
God dam it! Ok, who was worse then me? Somebody out there managed to get even higher on the scale then mine...
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 06:58:35 pm
Bluh. It doesn't matter anyway sine I intend to live forever. Though I might visit you guys from time to time >:3Although that test should take into account people that have their violent tendencies under control :/
It's your soul that's being judged, not what you do with it!
So, the average Bay12er is an intuitive thinker, and goes to Dis. Damn. And I wanted to be different D:
Post by: Blargityblarg on February 26, 2011, 07:03:47 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: andrea on February 26, 2011, 07:04:15 pm
I am in limbo instead. I think it fits me quite well.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 07:05:56 pm
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 07:07:31 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 07:09:35 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 07:10:52 pm
Max White did you say yeah you would assassinate somebody if it would make you rich and famous?You bet! In all realisem, if I knew I would get away with it, and there were riches to be found, then the earth is over populated as it is. Headshot to make there death fast.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:11:19 pm
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 07:12:25 pm
I did. And I don't hurt people... To be honest, if I was told to assassination a dictator, then I would do it.Go assassinate a dictator.
Post by: freeformschooler on February 26, 2011, 07:13:08 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 07:13:23 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:15:14 pm
Sorry, I am perfectly fine. Don't worry. I was just jking about the above.
NO. I DIDN'T OR SHOULD I SAY, HE DIDN'T
Post by: Christes on February 26, 2011, 07:15:31 pm
Can we do the Forer Test (http://forer.netopti.net/) next?
I bet everyone from this forum will get the same result there, too. ;)
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:17:04 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on February 26, 2011, 07:26:19 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
I'm surprised I scored so high on violence.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 07:26:49 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: sonerohi on February 26, 2011, 07:33:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I am apparantly just a great writhing orgy of sin and avarice. I got Dis, which I guess for the all-round terrible.
Post by: Grimlocke on February 26, 2011, 07:33:51 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So, not believing in the magic man worse than being lustful, gluttonous, wrathful, gloomy, violent, fraudulent, malicious, pandering and treacherous? What discreditment of all my proper sinning!
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:34:27 pm
Post by: Diablous on February 26, 2011, 07:34:46 pm
Spoiler: Forer test: (click to show/hide)
Hmm. A thing or two that doesn't describe me, but other than that, it's pretty accurate. The effect works.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:35:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 07:37:54 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 26, 2011, 07:38:32 pm
Spoiler: Forer (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:38:56 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 07:39:33 pm
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 07:41:37 pm
Antiantimatter. Ours look exactly the same..Naturally. The test is absurdly vague and is a demonstration of the Forer effect in action. There is only one category, and the only custom bit is the designation.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:42:15 pm
Oh. Well I did not know that.Antiantimatter. Ours look exactly the same..Naturally. The test is absurdly vague and is a demonstration of the Forer effect in action. There is only one category, and the only custom bit is the designation.
Post by: sonerohi on February 26, 2011, 07:42:22 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on February 26, 2011, 07:42:36 pm
Spoiler: Forer Test (click to show/hide)
And only having read this thread do I realise what the test actually was.
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:43:17 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:44:19 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:44:36 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: breadbocks on February 26, 2011, 07:45:28 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 07:46:21 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 07:47:06 pm
I was wondering when you all were going to catch on to the Forer Test's gimick.everything is a gimmick.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 07:47:28 pm
I got Malebolge. :-\Damnit! Now Im only the 4th most sinful person on these forums!
Post by: Diablous on February 26, 2011, 07:48:38 pm
I was wondering when you all were going to catch on to the Forer Test's gimick.
I feel kinda embarrased that it took me a while to figure it out. >_>
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:49:09 pm
Damnit! Now Im only the 4th most sinful person on these forums!Be glad that I'm too lazy to commit treason, or else you'd be fifth :P
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 07:50:35 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:51:15 pm
Post by: Megaman on February 26, 2011, 07:53:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 07:54:51 pm
I feel kinda embarrassed that it took me a while to figure it out. >_>Yeah. I think that no one noticed because no one paid proper attention to anyone else's results.
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 07:56:26 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 07:57:17 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 07:58:21 pm
It demonstrates the way that horoscopes and some personality quizzes works, and makes Forer my favourite psychologist ever.
By the way, the link I gave tells you the trick after you rate.
Post by: Diablous on February 26, 2011, 07:59:55 pm
I feel kinda embarrassed that it took me a while to figure it out. >_>Yeah. I think that no one noticed because no one paid proper attention to anyone else's results.
Well, I didn't find out until I read the other results and noticed that they were the same. And then I rated the thing, (I forgot to close the window) and it told me.
I knew beforehand. But really, do 3/4 of the people agree with this?
Apparently. It's supposed to be general enough to apply to anyone.
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 08:00:00 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 08:01:54 pm
(http://art.penny-arcade.com/photos/282861910_9Fj3W-L-2.jpg)I'm more interested in the elderich book.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 26, 2011, 08:02:46 pm
I took the test twice, and still didn't notice.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 08:11:19 pm
I knew beforehand. But really, do 3/4 of the people agree with this?
Apparently. It's supposed to be general enough to apply to anyone.
Not only is it general and vauge, but it implies positive things without being too ambitious or requiring the reader to prove the idea to themselves ("unused potential"), so it's really easy for most people to eat that up.
Post by: breadbocks on February 26, 2011, 08:13:06 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 08:14:50 pm
Quote
You also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof.Or
Quote
You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage.
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 08:16:04 pm
I would be the 1 in 4 who would say that was complete bull shit.Huzzah!
That's also part of it. I don't think many people would disagree withYa. Now the real question is, to whom would it really apply to?QuoteYou also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof.OrQuoteYou have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 08:27:17 pm
And whether it applies to people in reality is a whole different story, heh.
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 26, 2011, 08:35:39 pm
Spoiler: The Results (click to show/hide)
I'm sorry, but I've been enough of a goody 2-shoes for most of my life. That is total bullshit. I've been opening my mind a little more to other possibilities, and it makes this call.
Spoiler: Level 8 (click to show/hide)
I may have to cover my ears because they play soft rock 24/7 instead, and instead of fire and brimstone, it's more like the fluorescent halls of a dentist's office. Serpents, fires, and rotten egg/tear gas I can deal with; smooth jazz and Michael Bolton and so on in a cold bland environment, kill me many times over, for the love of God and the respect of the Devil. That's hell to me. Doesn't sound like much, but imagine being stuck there 24/7. All those other tortures are just ways of saying how getting a root canal would feel. Novacane or not.
Personally, I think torturous locations like mine would fit the bill for Hell better than Dante's Inferno describes. I mean, all that hellish crap is to be expected. Being trapped in the halls of a demon's boring-ass day of work would be just as bad. Especially if you expect tons of violence and being maimed. Being bored to death many times over is a more fitting way to demolish spirits. What better way than being stuck at work or a school for eternity? Heck, reliving childhood memories of waiting for a doctor's appointment to arrive or end would qualify as a level of hell itself. You can never leave such a dull place. You'd be begging for Dante's Inferno crap to happen, you're so bored.
Post by: Willfor on February 26, 2011, 08:36:07 pm
Spoiler: Hell test (click to show/hide)
Not an unexpected result.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:36:50 pm
Level 8? Me? That's pretty damn harsh. Level 4, 1, or 0 sounds more likely, but 8? Just because I "turn the other cheek" on other perspectives? Bullshit.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Welcome to the Malebolge!
Post by: breadbocks on February 26, 2011, 08:39:34 pm
Level 8? Me? That's pretty damn harsh. Level 4, 1, or 0 sounds more likely, but 8? Just because I "turn the other cheek" on other perspectives? Bullshit.Brofist, bro. B)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm sorry, but I've been enough of a goody 2-shoes for most of my life. That is total bullshit. I've been opening my mind a little more to other possibilities, and it makes this call.Maybe it's because I'm a patchwork of different flaws that makes me up that's a cause as well.Spoiler: LeLevel 8 (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 08:41:01 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:42:56 pm
You guyyyssss Sin me, let me join the cool place..*Hands over coat hanger*
Somewhere out there is a girl who was raped and is now pregnate. You know what to do.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 08:43:52 pm
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 08:43:59 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 08:44:31 pm
Post by: Diablous on February 26, 2011, 08:45:09 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:45:39 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 08:46:10 pm
Purgatory Repenting Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Very Low
Level 2 Lustful Very High
Level 3 Gluttonous Very High
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Very High
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy High
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Extreme
Level 7 Violent Extreme
Level 8- the Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Very High
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 08:46:26 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 08:47:01 pm
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 08:47:41 pm
You see level 7, thats violent. Time to live up to its name...Right so heres a bat and a some rocks, oh and have some cocktails now burn it, BURN IT ALL DOWN.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:48:17 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 08:48:41 pm
Post by: Willfor on February 26, 2011, 08:48:51 pm
Achivment unlocked! That should get me down into level 9.They're ranked according to type, not level, bro.
You only unlock hard mode by doing it worse.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:49:48 pm
God damn Max, and I thought I was a sinful atheist heathen.Hey, all I'm saying is that level 2 is more fun then they tell you about.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 08:49:58 pm
Cease posting about Max nearing the Too Far line. I don't want this thread locked.Achivment unlocked! That should get me down into level 9.They're ranked according to type, not level, bro.
You only unlock hard mode by doing it worse.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 08:51:36 pm
God damn Max, and I thought I was a sinful atheist heathen.
Wait, which Max, me, or Max White?
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 08:53:50 pm
Cease posting about Max nearing the Too Far line. I don't want this thread locked.Then put up a new quiz and change the topic of conversation.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:54:23 pm
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 08:54:27 pm
It's a shame levels 2, 3 and 4 are so lonely. We could use a glutton to get drunk on a daily basis.It's too bad that level 6 is where all the cool kids hang out.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:55:10 pm
It's too bad that level 6 is where all the cool kids hang out.
Level 6 is for people who wish they could get into level 8.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 08:55:45 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 08:56:14 pm
You.God damn Max, and I thought I was a sinful atheist heathen.
Wait, which Max, me, or Max White?
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 08:56:48 pm
Well lv 7 is the naked mosh pit...Sounds very much like level 2, only with more broken glass.
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 09:01:37 pm
Less likely to work if you enter with a sceptical mindset or your personality really is very different. Then again, horoscope writers can use it on some of the people all of the time, so...
And whether it applies to people in reality is a whole different story, heh.
I remember thinking "Well, this is neat and largely applicable to me, though I don't know where they got the 'you have loads more unlocked potential' from. How does this correspond in any way to the test I just took?"
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 09:02:51 pm
notice how most of us (i think) has that same intrinsic.Less likely to work if you enter with a sceptical mindset or your personality really is very different. Then again, horoscope writers can use it on some of the people all of the time, so...
And whether it applies to people in reality is a whole different story, heh.
I remember thinking "Well, this is neat and largely applicable to me, though I don't know where they got the 'you have loads more unlocked potential' from. How does this correspond in any way to the test I just took?"
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 09:04:03 pm
You.God damn Max, and I thought I was a sinful atheist heathen.
Wait, which Max, me, or Max White?
Ah, yes. Muahahaha!
At the very least, I do self identify as evil, anyway.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 09:04:49 pm
Less likely to work if you enter with a sceptical mindset or your personality really is very different. Then again, horoscope writers can use it on some of the people all of the time, so...
And whether it applies to people in reality is a whole different story, heh.
I remember thinking "Well, this is neat and largely applicable to me, though I don't know where they got the 'you have loads more unlocked potential' from. How does this correspond in any way to the test I just took?"
That was their sneaky way of allowing you to demonstrate this line to yourself
Quote
You also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof.
It ties itself up very neatly :)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:05:18 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:05:57 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 09:09:29 pm
I'm not evil, just chaotic, so when a nice lawful good system is set up to catogarise people into subdevisions, how can I not exploit it to see just how evil I can be?Chaotic stupid, most likely.
<_<
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:10:05 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 09:12:06 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 26, 2011, 09:13:29 pm
I don't think the elements would have an easy time determining where I belong in the afterlife when the time comes. It helps I've been resolving issues all over the place with my free time. Personally, I wouldn't mind being stuck on my 'Endless Beach' purgatory for a few years until a decision has been made. At least I would have a good view of Heaven and hell, and depending on which one looks closer will tell me where the scales are weighed closer toward, and dealing with the purgatory would assist in the decision making for the jury of the afterlife.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:13:41 pm
I am, by definition, Lawful Evil. I would happily tie the law into knots using loopholes if I wasn't so damned lazy.
Can lazy - neutural - active be a new alignment axis?
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 09:13:56 pm
I remember thinking "Well, this is neat and largely applicable to me, though I don't know where they got the 'you have loads more unlocked potential' from. How does this correspond in any way to the test I just took?"THEY SECRETLY BASE IT ON YOUR STAR SIGN
I mean, uh, they could've done a more convincing job with the actual test. Asking questions about self appraisal and worth and stuff would've helped somewhat.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 09:14:36 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 09:15:19 pm
I prefer the term Apathetic Evil.Way
too
easy
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 09:15:52 pm
I prefer the term Apathetic Evil.Way
too
easy
No, no, go ahead.
Post by: Heliman on February 26, 2011, 09:17:25 pm
Quote
Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:17:34 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:18:33 pm
Spoiler: Fair warning! Large image! (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 09:20:00 pm
And now we are on alignment issues.Wonderful. A "What DnD alignment are you?" quiz can be found here (http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html).
Post by: Cthulhu on February 26, 2011, 09:20:13 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 09:22:31 pm
Alignment is overdone. I won't change the poll to it. Unfortuantely, the Are You Hitler test crosses The Line, so I'm out of ideas. Suggestions?And now we are on alignment issues.Wonderful. A "What DnD alignment are you?" quiz can be found here (http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html).
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 09:24:48 pm
Hey, chaotic people have their own moral guidelines.I don't know about moral, but there's some lines I refuse to cross.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 09:27:05 pm
Purgatory. Why so heretical, bay12?
What good is having a life if you never live it?
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:29:01 pm
And now we are on alignment issues.Wonderful. A "What DnD alignment are you?" quiz can be found here (http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html).
Ok, so I got.
True Neutral- A true neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. He doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most true neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil after all, he would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, he's not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. Some true neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run. True neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you act naturally, without prejudice or compulsion. However, true neutral can be a dangerous alignment because it represents apathy, indifference, and a lack of conviction.
Detailed Results:
Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXX (9)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (19)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXXXXX (9)
Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXX (4)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Chaos --- XXXX (4)
Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Neutral - XXXXXXXX (8)
Evil ---- XXXXX (5)
Post by: Vector on February 26, 2011, 09:35:04 pm
Eating everything -> chubster that won't be able to sprint after the bus anymore
Wrath -> no one likes you, lower chance of survival
"There is no god" -> how the fuck am I supposed to prove that; the god of the gaps is good enough for me
Don't read scripture -> no cultural understanding; lower chance of survival
Math and science > everything -> farewell, literature; farewell, art; farewell, philosophy. A human is not a mathematical object.
Depression -> depression
"We own every single dollar we make" -> selfishness breeds selfishness; lower chance of survival
No repenting -> No learning from mistakes that hurt other people needlessly
And so on, and so forth. Most of my beliefs are pragmatic. I managed to get into purgatory despite a large number of things on the sin list, including lusting after women and so on.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 26, 2011, 09:37:16 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 09:38:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nothing new there.
Post by: Dragooble on February 26, 2011, 09:39:12 pm
Detailed Results:
Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXXXXX (9)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXX (9)
Chaos --- XXXXXXXXX (9)
Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXX (9)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Evil ---- XXX (3)
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 09:40:29 pm
I got Level 6 and I'm not even that heretical. I almost got Limbo though, I guess I'm just too much of an atheist to be a good person. :(Purgatory. Why so heretical, bay12?What good is having a life if you never live it?
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:41:13 pm
Neutral Good- A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias for or against order. However, neutral good can be a dangerous alignment because because it advances mediocrity by limiting the actions of the truly capable.
Detailed Results:
Alignment:
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (28)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (22)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (23)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXX (6)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXX (6)
Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXX (6)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXX (12)
Chaos --- XXXXXX (6)
Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (16)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Evil ---- (0)
Post by: Leafsnail on February 26, 2011, 09:42:00 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 09:42:20 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:43:04 pm
Post by: Diablous on February 26, 2011, 09:46:35 pm
Spoiler: Alignment (click to show/hide)
Neutral good. I'd think that's pretty accurate.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 09:46:59 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cheeetar on February 26, 2011, 09:49:23 pm
Spoiler: Alignment (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:50:25 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 09:51:27 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:52:21 pm
Evil 0? Ochita is the messiah!
All hail Ochita! All hail Ochita!Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...
Post by: Ricky on February 26, 2011, 09:54:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Where can i find the dante's test?
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:54:34 pm
Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 09:54:54 pm
Spoiler: Alignment (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:55:51 pm
Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 09:56:28 pm
Exactly.Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 26, 2011, 09:57:03 pm
Spoiler: True Neutral (click to show/hide)
Considering my more recent personality, it seems more likely I'd be neutral.
"If I don't survive this, tell my wife I said 'Hello.'" -Neutral Leader
Post by: Tarran on February 26, 2011, 09:57:30 pm
Spoiler: I'm so average. (click to show/hide)
Where can i find the dante's test?Second to the bottom of page 11.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 09:57:36 pm
Ochita may very well be the only one here who shouldn't be locked away for a rather long time.Exactly.Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 26, 2011, 09:59:14 pm
Spoiler: Lawful Neutral (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Detailed Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 09:59:48 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:02:03 pm
I also give everyone equal housing.Although not equal housing, I make an effort to provide minimum 3*3 rooms, and when possible a caged animal of the dwarfs choosing, with high quality cages, beds, and storage furnature. The reason for this is that it allows for more deaths with less tantrums.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:03:24 pm
Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:06:03 pm
Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it comming!
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 10:07:15 pm
I also give everyone equal housing.I do that too though :/
Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it comming!And you stop with the innuendo!
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:07:29 pm
Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 26, 2011, 10:07:53 pm
Kinda overplaying the "evil" to the point of comedic. You're making evil look bad.Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it comming!Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 10:08:20 pm
Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it coming!And this is why we have more neutral Bay12ers than good ones.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:08:28 pm
Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it comming!And you stop with the innuendo!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhtFKNNd04A
Post by: Tarran on February 26, 2011, 10:08:45 pm
I give people a lot of room in their rooms too. Usually 3x3 or at the very, very least 2x2. Not because it's advantageous or anything, but because I can and want to because it makes my fortress look nice. Nobles do get better rooms if they're special ones, but so far I haven't gotten any lately so...I also give everyone equal housing.Although not equal housing, I make an effort to provide minimum 3*3 rooms, and when possible a caged animal of the dwarfs choosing, with high quality cages, beds, and storage furnature. The reason for this is that it allows for more deaths with less tantrums.
Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it comming!He has every right to; if he can even hold the high ground up, then that means he's a freaking god or something. :P
Alright, alright, we get it, you can stop.Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
AND EVERYONE PLEASE GIVE ME A CHANCE TO POST FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:09:19 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 10:09:48 pm
It's called Stupid Evil.Kinda overplaying the "evil" to the point of comedic. You're making evil look bad.Stop waving your moral high ground in my face. When a noble is demanding slade toy boats, he has it comming!Fun Fact: I don't kill anything in dwarf fortress, a pacifist fort.Oh you guys... I know that I am awesomely not evil but still...Fun Fact: Bay12 harvests mermaids for their bones. The standard for 'good' might be a little distorted.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:10:29 pm
Evil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.
They can? I thought it was still against the rules but they did it anyway! Why did nobody tell me this before?
I'm converting!
Post by: woose1 on February 26, 2011, 10:10:50 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 10:11:16 pm
Evil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.
Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
Post by: Korbac on February 26, 2011, 10:12:19 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 10:13:58 pm
Would I be wrong in assuming that when the dwarf representing you dies, you have your scheming second-in-command PULL THE LEVER that drops the whole fort into the Great Magma Sea?Evil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.
Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
Post by: woose1 on February 26, 2011, 10:15:02 pm
Some people are more equal than others. :DEvil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:15:23 pm
Wow, I admire you Ochita. Not only are you forgoing the obvious "cool factor", a pacisfist fort must be rather tough...Not really. You just need to be careful.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:15:40 pm
Funny, I was just thinking of becon.Some people are more equal than others. :DEvil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
Post by: woose1 on February 26, 2011, 10:16:37 pm
THE FUCK IS WITH YOU AND HAMFunny, I was just thinking of becon.Some people are more equal than others. :DEvil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:19:04 pm
Seems somebody isn't a fan of the works of George Orwell.THE FUCK IS WITH YOU AND HAMFunny, I was just thinking of becon.Some people are more equal than others. :DEvil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 26, 2011, 10:24:17 pm
Would I be wrong in assuming that when the dwarf representing you dies, you have your scheming second-in-command PULL THE LEVER that drops the whole fort into the Great Magma Sea?Evil is when you make people dispair, evil is when you indirectly ruin peoples lives when you cant be bothered to do it yourself, evil... Evil can be wicked.
Yes, yes I can. Er..it can. Anyway, I also give all of my dorfs equal housing. Except me, of course.
No, I'm not that predictable. I release a boatload of caged animals in my dining room.
Dorf1: "How did that troupe of dozen Elephants get down the sta.." *GRK*
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:25:17 pm
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 10:26:13 pm
So cruel... I let my dwarfs die of old age..How do they survive that long?
Post by: Taricus on February 26, 2011, 10:26:23 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:30:39 pm
I keep sieges out.. I keep beatings down. I get resources for strange moods, I dont try to kill them, and they live.So cruel... I let my dwarfs die of old age..How do they survive that long?
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 10:31:16 pm
Lawful Good ----- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
Neutral Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (17)
Chaotic Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (18)
Lawful Neutral -- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (20)
True Neutral ---- XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (20)
Chaotic Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (21)
Lawful Evil ----- XXXXXXX (7)
Neutral Evil ---- XXXXXXX (7)
Chaotic Evil ---- XXXXXXXX (8)
Law & Chaos:
Law ----- XXXXXX (6)
Neutral - XXXXXX (6)
Chaos --- XXXXXXX (7)
Good & Evil:
Good ---- XXXXXXXXXXX (11)
Neutral - XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (14)
Evil ---- X (1)
Oh shit is it moral Debate time?
ON GOES THE MORAL DEBATE HAT
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:33:44 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 10:34:30 pm
Or am I not evil enough?
IS NOTHING GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU?!?!?!?
Post by: Megaman on February 26, 2011, 10:34:40 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 10:36:32 pm
Post by: Willfor on February 26, 2011, 10:44:49 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:45:00 pm
I AM SO EVILREALMFIGHTER I LOVE YOU
Or am I not evil enough?
IS NOTHING GOOD ENOUGH FOR YOU?!?!?!?
But you are too evil
UNLESS YOU WANT THIS TO BE MERELY A GOOD-EVIL RELATIONSHIP/
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 10:47:32 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:48:35 pm
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 10:50:06 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 10:50:35 pm
Aren't Good aligned characters supposed to be prejudiced against evil ones?Unless it would be smart to do so, yeah.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:53:29 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 10:54:13 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 10:54:48 pm
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 10:55:26 pm
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 10:55:36 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 10:57:38 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 26, 2011, 11:00:34 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:05:02 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:07:04 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 11:07:21 pm
Listen, you cannot convert me. I am like a paladin, only that I'm not Zealous and that I have a bit of freedom.Hey, Ochita. I'd like to give you this free bar of gold. Don't look behind you. No reason, just don't. There is not a baby crawling across the highway. Now take the gold, my gift offer is closing fast!
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 11:08:22 pm
Listen, you cannot convert me. I am like a paladin, only that I'm not Zealous and that I have a bit of freedom.A paladin can easily be made evil. So long as he thinks he is doing right, he will do what he is told to be right. In the right circumstances, you can get anyone to perform the most monstrous acts with a clean conscience.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:10:00 pm
Listen, you cannot convert me. I am like a SMART paladin, only that I'm not Zealous and that I have a bit of freedom.And I would go save the baby.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:10:45 pm
A paladin can easily be made evil. So long as he thinks he is doing right, he will do what he is told to be right. In the right circumstances, you can get anyone to perform the most monstrous acts with a clean conscience.Ah, but if he thinks he's doing right, then the only way he isn't is if you say he is doing evil.
And saying someone is doing evil isn't really all that hard.
Listen, you cannot convert me. I am like a SMART paladin, only that I'm not Zealous and that I have a bit of freedom.And I would go save the baby.
Intelligence is Evil.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 26, 2011, 11:11:49 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:12:03 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:12:23 pm
Evil is Freedom.Chaos is freedom. Get your facts straight.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:13:03 pm
And Chaos is Evil. I can Logic.Evil is Freedom.Chaos is freedom. Get your facts straight.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 11:13:18 pm
Evil is Freedom.
Intelligence is Evil.Freedom is Liberty.
Liberty is Good.
Good is Evil.
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:13:36 pm
And Chaos is Evil. I can Logic.Logical fallacies, yeah.
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 11:14:14 pm
where are you guys getting this?
Uhm... Kierkegaard's Discourses in DnD Alignment?
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:14:24 pm
Evil is Freedom.Intelligence is Evil.Freedom is Liberty.
Liberty is Good.
Good is Evil.
Nietzsche is Beyond Good and Evil
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:14:37 pm
Actually Chaos and evil can be entirely different, anarchists, they just want us to do good because we want to, not because we have to.And Chaos is Evil. I can Logic.Evil is Freedom.Chaos is freedom. Get your facts straight.
Post by: Grimlocke on February 26, 2011, 11:15:07 pm
Spoiler: test thingy (click to show/hide)
Not off so far, though not quite accurate about seeking to eliminate all authority in life.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:15:27 pm
Being Without Laws is not Being Without Order.
Actually Chaos and evil can be entirely different, anarchists, they just want us to do good because we want to, not because we have to.
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 11:16:50 pm
where are you guys getting this?Uhm... Kierkegaard's Discourses in DnD Alignment?
Nietzsche is Beyond Good and EvilExcuse me. Nietzche's Jenseits von Lawful und Chaotic
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 11:17:04 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 11:17:53 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:18:00 pm
But too much law can limit freedom.Being Without Laws is not Being Without Order.
Actually Chaos and evil can be entirely different, anarchists, they just want us to do good because we want to, not because we have to.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:18:11 pm
I thought Freedom is Slavery.
No, they are sort of the opposit thing. Your thinking of freedom and enslaving others.
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:18:45 pm
Being Without Laws is not Being Without Order.Chaos pretty much means without order. Laws are just a subset of order.
But too much law can limit freedom.Point in case: tyranical dictatures. (LE)
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 26, 2011, 11:19:19 pm
Laws limit freedom simply by existing.But too much law can limit freedom.Being Without Laws is not Being Without Order.
Actually Chaos and evil can be entirely different, anarchists, they just want us to do good because we want to, not because we have to.
That reference went right over your head.I thought Freedom is Slavery.
No, they are sort of the opposit thing. Your thinking of freedom and enslaving others.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:20:16 pm
That reference went right over your head.
You would be amazed just how many things do.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:20:44 pm
He is talking about Anarchism as an Absence of Order. It is not. It is an absence of laws, not Order.Being Without Laws is not Being Without Order.Chaos pretty much means without order. Laws are just a subset of order.
Post by: Willfor on February 26, 2011, 11:21:24 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:21:51 pm
Also, I prefer to think of Chaos as playing by your own rules, rather by those set up by others.
Fire is wet!The sun is black! (true fact!)
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:22:39 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:23:33 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 26, 2011, 11:24:30 pm
Can we do another quiz now? Anything? (http://www.quizazz.com/quiz.php/710299/What-plants-vs-zombies-character-are-you/)Such would be treason to Ochita, The Great Pure One! Send this traitor to the work camps!
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:25:18 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:25:39 pm
No, we must show how I am more pure than you.You're so pure, you're to Vector what Jesus was to his so called dad.
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 11:25:55 pm
Aww, there are some cool quizes out there. (http://quizfarm.com/quizzes/new/beggarsbanquet9/which-member-of-the-fab-four-beatles-are-you/)Don't even have to take it. George.
Wow, that quiz kinda sucks though. I swear it's like the questions are "Was your mother's name Julia?" "Does anyone believe you are dead?"
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:27:42 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:32:26 pm
Well I do exist to help people.No, we must show how I am more pure than you.You're so pure, you're to Vector what Jesus was to his so called dad.
Post by: fqllve on February 26, 2011, 11:34:49 pm
And I mean the more effort they put into making it look legit, when there is no reasoning involved, makes it even more fun! (http://www.findyourfate.com/deathmeter/deathmtr.html)I choose to abstain from food:
(http://img.ie/a1041.png)
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:38:09 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 26, 2011, 11:43:21 pm
Huh... I end at 2080...Haha! I live to 2088! And I'm only 2 years younger than you! That means I live 6 years longer! Yay me!
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:44:09 pm
Well atleast I don't have to live to see you guys die.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 26, 2011, 11:44:25 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:45:00 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 26, 2011, 11:45:51 pm
My time of death is apparently "whenever you fucking want!"...Wow, your parents must've struck a deal with elder gods or something.
Post by: Lysabild on February 26, 2011, 11:46:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on February 26, 2011, 11:46:59 pm
My mom's old enough to be one.My time of death is apparently "whenever you fucking want!"...Wow, your parents must've struck a deal with elder gods or something.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 11:47:15 pm
Meh I don't feel neutral tbh <_<I like how evil has sunglasses.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:47:37 pm
Or they were the elder gods... But then again I didn't hear about Ochita having a son, so that can't be true.My time of death is apparently "whenever you fucking want!"...Wow, your parents must've struck a deal with elder gods or something.
Post by: Cheeetar on February 26, 2011, 11:47:59 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 26, 2011, 11:49:03 pm
So you're half elder-god? Lucky. :|My mom's old enough to be one.My time of death is apparently "whenever you fucking want!"...Wow, your parents must've struck a deal with elder gods or something.
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:49:53 pm
Oh, no. I gave birth to him in the future and then sent him back in time. It all works.Or they were the elder gods... But then again I didn't hear about Ochita having a son, so that can't be true.My time of death is apparently "whenever you fucking want!"...Wow, your parents must've struck a deal with elder gods or something.
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:50:47 pm
Oh, no. I gave birth to him in the future and then sent him back in time. It all works.
Ochita is Skynet?
Post by: ToonyMan on February 26, 2011, 11:51:54 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 26, 2011, 11:52:13 pm
Post by: Lysabild on February 26, 2011, 11:52:21 pm
FFFFFFFFUUUUUUU
Post by: Grimlocke on February 26, 2011, 11:52:43 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on February 26, 2011, 11:52:58 pm
Ochita is Skynet?
Who is also a Seahorse?
Post by: Max White on February 26, 2011, 11:53:38 pm
Your Armageddon's day is Jul 29 2069...
FFFFFFFFUUUUUUU
Ooh, so close. But I still get to die first.
Ochita is Skynet?
Who is also a Seahorse?
All hail the mighty pure skynet seahorse!
Post by: Lysabild on February 26, 2011, 11:55:58 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on February 27, 2011, 12:05:42 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:07:37 am
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 12:08:52 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:09:35 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:09:52 am
Just please before 69, k?
MUST... RESIST... INUENDO!!!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 12:10:12 am
LAW ASSHAT. :PBut then you'd be suffering the unclean to live. +1 Evil for Ochita. The Emperor is very disapointed with you, young man.
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:11:34 am
Oh, don't you know, I suffer for their sins.LAW ASSHAT. :PBut then you'd be suffering the unclean to live. +1 Evil for Ochita. The Emperor is very disapointed with you, young man.
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
+99999 good
-2 evil.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 27, 2011, 12:12:20 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 12:13:06 am
Ha ha, I'll outlive several of you!But not meeee~! :P
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 12:14:08 am
Ha ha, I'll outlive several of you!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
But we all know the 60'ies are cooler than the 70'ies!
Also, please make sure we get that ww3 before my death, or I can't die trying to stop a nuclear bomb with my hands!
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:14:25 am
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 27, 2011, 12:14:48 am
Committing the insane hubris of implying oneself to be the Messiah:Oh, don't you know, I suffer for their sins.LAW ASSHAT. :PBut then you'd be suffering the unclean to live. +1 Evil for Ochita. The Emperor is very disapointed with you, young man.
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
+99999 good
-2 evil.
+100000 evil
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:15:59 am
Oh no you don't get it. When the aliens come, I'll be the person to strike the deal of them only killing me.Committing the insane hubris of implying oneself to be the Messiah:Oh, don't you know, I suffer for their sins.LAW ASSHAT. :PBut then you'd be suffering the unclean to live. +1 Evil for Ochita. The Emperor is very disapointed with you, young man.
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
+99999 good
-2 evil.
+100000 evil
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 12:17:01 am
I don't know why the internet hates me. It plans to send me to a rather deep pit of hell, and sometime soon, when I'm not even evil! Just true neutural...Not in the eyes of GAWD you aren't.
Good luck with that. (http://qntm.org/geocide)Ha ha, I'll outlive several of you!But not meeee~! :P
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:17:10 am
Oh no you don't get it. When the aliens come, I'll be the person to strike the deal of them only killing me.
That sounds reasonable. It also might explain just how you got pregnate.
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 12:17:15 am
Committing the insane hubris of implying oneself to be the Messiah:It's not hubris if others (in his case, me) say it first!
+100000 evil
Oh dear. Are you saying I'm half alien?Oh no you don't get it. When the aliens come, I'll be the person to strike the deal of them only killing me.
That sounds reasonable. It also might explain just how you got pregnate.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 12:17:53 am
Aliens?! You sure they'd kill you and not infest you with anal propes? :bOh no you don't get it. When the aliens come, I'll be the person to strike the deal of them only killing me.Committing the insane hubris of implying oneself to be the Messiah:Oh, don't you know, I suffer for their sins.LAW ASSHAT. :PBut then you'd be suffering the unclean to live. +1 Evil for Ochita. The Emperor is very disapointed with you, young man.
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
+99999 good
-2 evil.
+100000 evil
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:18:47 am
The anal probes would probably kill me.Aliens?! You sure they'd kill you and not infest you with anal propes? :bOh no you don't get it. When the aliens come, I'll be the person to strike the deal of them only killing me.Committing the insane hubris of implying oneself to be the Messiah:Oh, don't you know, I suffer for their sins.LAW ASSHAT. :PBut then you'd be suffering the unclean to live. +1 Evil for Ochita. The Emperor is very disapointed with you, young man.
And anyway. I wont start WW3... Yet...
+99999 good
-2 evil.
+100000 evil
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 27, 2011, 12:19:12 am
Oh no you don't get it. When the aliens come, I'll be the person to strike the deal of them only killing me.Like hell we, uh, they would agree to that.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 12:19:36 am
Post by: Zrk2 on February 27, 2011, 12:20:10 am
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 12:20:43 am
Cartman is fine, you'll be too.Cartman
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:20:53 am
Oh dear. Are you saying I'm half alien?
What are the race modifyers for a half elder god, half alien?
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 12:21:32 am
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 12:21:49 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 12:21:55 am
What happened to this thread? Last time I checked it was about personality types.MSHenanigans happened, Zrk2.
MSHenanigans happened.
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:22:31 am
+2 Int, +4 Cha, -6 Wis, I believe.
Any good feats?
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:25:34 am
I'm guessing graspers...+2 Int, +4 Cha, -6 Wis, I believe.
Any good feats?
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 12:26:31 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:27:00 am
I'm guessing graspers...
Hate you guys! Why must sexual inuendo be taboo when your doing your best to set me up.
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 12:28:34 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:29:28 am
Post by: MaximumZero on February 27, 2011, 12:30:32 am
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 12:31:09 am
Then don't even try to ask about my inventory :3 (http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Rod_of_Lordly_Might)
XD!! I'm in tears from laughter thanks!!
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 12:32:27 am
Whilst flanked, or flanking, from the rear?Elder gods/Skynet always does it from behind.
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 27, 2011, 12:35:05 am
Meh. Death at 81 years ain't too bad, though I kinda wanted to see if I could squeeze out more years. Oh well, wouldn't want to stick around for too long if society turns to crap anyhow.
Post by: Dragooble on February 27, 2011, 12:38:59 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:40:46 am
Your Armageddon's day is 0 25 2066
Meh. Death at 81 years ain't too bad, though I kinda wanted to see if I could squeeze out more years. Oh well, wouldn't want to stick around for too long if society turns to crap anyhow.
Noo! I'm going to live to see you die. We can't let that happen, we must protect Itnetlolor!
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 27, 2011, 12:42:59 am
A real man can't die, even if he's killed.Your Armageddon's day is 0 25 2066Noo! I'm going to live to see you die. We can't let that happen, we must protect Itnetlolor!
Meh. Death at 81 years ain't too bad, though I kinda wanted to see if I could squeeze out more years. Oh well, wouldn't want to stick around for too long if society turns to crap anyhow.
With true confidence in my spirit, and sheer willpower, I could probably extend my life to as far as 120 years; but provided the future is interesting enough to keep me alive. Otherwise, I'll just retire to the other side.
EDIT:
BTW, How the hell am I supposed to read that date? That was how it came out. MMDDYYYY? Then what is month 0?
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 12:44:45 am
A real man can't die, even if he's killed.
Well the clock says you sign out at '66, so man the hell up!
Post by: Taricus on February 27, 2011, 12:45:36 am
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 27, 2011, 12:47:09 am
I refuse to submit to this test :PYeah, the thing isn't at all accurate. It's mostly a wild guess. With luck, no one will try to enforce these dates.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 27, 2011, 12:57:55 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 01:00:51 am
BTW, How the hell am I supposed to read that date? That was how it came out. MMDDYYYY? Then what is month 0?
Beconary. The month that the norse used to worship becon, and dinned on pig related meat and mead.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 01:12:00 am
BTW, How the hell am I supposed to read that date? That was how it came out. MMDDYYYY? Then what is month 0?
Beconary. The month that the norse used to worship becon, and dinned on pig related meat and mead.
Huh? Bacon mead sounds.. Nasty..
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 01:13:12 am
BTW, How the hell am I supposed to read that date? That was how it came out. MMDDYYYY? Then what is month 0?
Beconary. The month that the norse used to worship becon, and dinned on pig related meat and mead.
Huh? Bacon mead sounds.. Nasty..
Not at all! You simple collect the golden fat that drips from a well done piece of becon, then let it ferment, and drink the sweet goodness!
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 01:16:05 am
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 27, 2011, 01:31:47 am
Post by: Heliman on February 27, 2011, 01:36:59 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
Porkfelwein seems easy enough to make but you must add something you cannot buy at your local homebrew store - Love.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 01:55:51 am
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 01:59:20 am
The world is a disgusting place.Hey! >:(
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 02:00:05 am
What?The world is a disgusting place.Hey! >:(
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 02:03:04 am
What?...You don't get the joke? Look at my sig.
Post by: Heliman on February 27, 2011, 02:17:44 am
The world is a disgusting place.Only if you're a vegetarian.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 02:20:50 am
I eat TONS of meat and rarely bother with vegetables, however I am not gonna start drinking alcohol made from bacon and apple.The world is a disgusting place.Only if you're a vegetarian.
Post by: Heliman on February 27, 2011, 02:25:14 am
God now I want a burger.
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 02:26:01 am
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 27, 2011, 02:30:51 am
For some reason the cannedwich comes to mind. Not even the almighty Colbert Bump could save that product.
Post by: Heron TSG on February 27, 2011, 03:01:22 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:39:14 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 04:44:36 am
Well, iT could be because they are evil, BUT I'M NOT GOOD EITHER!!!
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:45:48 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 04:47:02 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:47:47 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 04:49:56 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:51:29 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 04:53:17 am
And somehow a seahorse is in there. And aliens! I recall aliens.
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:55:46 am
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 04:56:13 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 05:00:46 am
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 08:19:38 am
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 08:29:14 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I really have to say I'm disappointed, as I see myself as much more Neutral Good in reality. And because Chaotic Good is just naive and stupid. Really, the whole "Good" arm really should go: Unthinking Inane Naive - Only Way To Actually Achieve Anything Good - Childishly Stupid Naive.
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 08:40:46 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 08:44:34 am
Ya, that's stupid good for ya. 'cept Ochita ain't stupid.Yeah!
Although I am neutral good..
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 08:46:30 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 08:47:18 am
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 08:49:50 am
True, although lawful good isn't always lawful stupid.
Of course it is.
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 08:51:44 am
Post by: Mindmaker on February 27, 2011, 08:54:07 am
Can't find it.
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 08:56:08 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:02:49 am
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 09:06:41 am
Well then. I guess that neutral good is the way to go. More fun.
Pfffftt, why be biased towards good? True Neutral, doesn't give a shit eitherway :D
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:07:49 am
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 09:08:41 am
Yeah, but this way, I can be the hero dood.*rimshot*
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 09:10:47 am
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 09:11:25 am
Yeah, but this way, I can be the hero dood.Exactly, good is still more agreeable than apathy.
Chaotic neutral is the way to go! Do whatever the frig you want!Jump of bridges anytime!
Post by: Taricus on February 27, 2011, 09:13:44 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:16:33 am
Being a hero isn't fun, people will ask for shit, take it without a thanks and then ask you to die for them. And evil people kill and take till somebody kills them and takes. WHY BOTHER EITHERWAY. Just sit down, drink some tea and go "Pfffttt, can't be bothered."Well then some harmless fun doesn't hurt any one.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 09:24:47 am
Being a hero isn't fun, people will ask for shit, take it without a thanks and then ask you to die for them. And evil people kill and take till somebody kills them and takes. WHY BOTHER EITHERWAY. Just sit down, drink some tea and go "Pfffttt, can't be bothered."Well then some harmless fun doesn't hurt any one.
y so inocnt? ;_;
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:29:51 am
Post by: Keita on February 27, 2011, 09:30:43 am
Post by: Taricus on February 27, 2011, 09:34:14 am
Post by: Keita on February 27, 2011, 09:35:25 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:39:05 am
Post by: Keita on February 27, 2011, 09:40:06 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:45:19 am
Post by: Keita on February 27, 2011, 09:46:24 am
Post by: MaximumZero on February 27, 2011, 09:48:13 am
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 09:51:41 am
Post by: Keita on February 27, 2011, 09:52:11 am
Post by: The Doctor on February 27, 2011, 09:53:04 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Keita on February 27, 2011, 09:54:32 am
Okay, for the Dante's test, I think this is pretty special. :DSpoiler (click to show/hide)
I remember that one, only because I got lumped into one of the worst circles of hell...
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 09:55:10 am
Actually neutral goods are okay with anyone who are on their team.... Supposedly.. ><Why would neutral goodie people be fine with evil (god I hate using that as a label) people? They're neutral on the lawful-chaotic line, not good-evil. At least that's the way I see it. Just like a lawful neutral person could "get along" with both lawful good and evil, but not with any of the chaotic alignments; a neutral gooder wouldn't have a problem with other goodies, but definitely still be pissed of at evil-doers.
Yesterday, I was Lawful Evil. Today, I'm Chaotic Evil. ...wtf, test?The first is your civilian identity, the Chaotic Evil one is the personality of Maximum Zero, Retail Mercenary. And ninja.
ARGH PEOPLE STOP NINJAING ME!
Post by: Grimlocke on February 27, 2011, 10:41:11 am
Post by: Myroc on February 27, 2011, 10:48:34 am
Yep, Chaotic Evil here.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 27, 2011, 10:53:18 am
Let's see,Are you implying that you're an exception to B? Because I'd say the attitude "Noone else matters" would put you pretty firmly into prick territory.I thinkI know that everyone else in existence is either A: An idiot or B: A total prick, which means I am the only person in the world that actually matters. Not to mention that I have questionable ethics and morals to begin with.
Post by: Diablous on February 27, 2011, 10:54:19 am
Your Armageddon's day is Feb 30 2085.
Well, I'm going to live a while.
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 11:00:02 am
And believing in either would make you a shining example of A. Maybe the point he's making is that he is a rare example of AB?Let's see,Are you implying that you're an exception to B? Because I'd say the attitude "Noone else matters" would put you pretty firmly into prick territory.I thinkI know that everyone else in existence is either A: An idiot or B: A total prick, which means I am the only person in the world that actually matters. Not to mention that I have questionable ethics and morals to begin with.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 27, 2011, 11:07:32 am
Actually, I think this not very serious one is better than a serious one I've seen before. On that one, when I tried to make my death date as soon as possible, I got a result saying I'd live to be 600 (I think putting in that I'd had 99 unprotected and 99 protected sex partners may have seriously screwed up its calculations. Or maybe it assumed that if all the stuff I'd been doing hadn't killed me already, I must be virtually immortal).
FAKEEDIT: spoke too soon. Putting in what I thought were the worst possible ones got me "Your Armageddon's day is Jan 26 4012".
EDIT: I can see the problem now. For some reason, recalculating it makes it push your date way into the future.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 11:11:34 am
Because I am more pure than everyone else. See the thread title? :P
Pure? How pure are you really though, huh? ò_ó *prods*
My Armageddon's day is Feb 25 2075.
Actually, I think this not very serious one is better than a serious one I've seen before. On that one, when I tried to make my death date as soon as possible, I got a result saying I'd live to be 600 (I think putting in that I'd had 99 unprotected and 99 protected sex partners may have seriously screwed up its calculations. Or maybe it assumed that if all the stuff I'd been doing hadn't killed me already, I must be virtually immortal).
FAKEEDIT: spoke too soon. Putting in what I thought were the worst possible ones got me "Your Armageddon's day is Jan 26 4012".
That is AWESOME XD
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 27, 2011, 01:22:29 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 27, 2011, 01:32:42 pm
Let's see,You sound like an asshole.I thinkI know that everyone else in existence is either A: An idiot or B: A total prick, which means I am the only person in the world that actually matters. Not to mention that I have questionable ethics and morals to begin with.
Yep, Chaotic Evil here.
Post by: Tellemurius on February 27, 2011, 01:34:37 pm
Post by: Heron TSG on February 27, 2011, 01:58:54 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 02:05:54 pm
Spoiler: Meh. (click to show/hide)
Now, I dare Ochita to take the test a second time. :P
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 02:08:42 pm
Now, I dare Ochita to take the test a second time. :PTHE CHALLENGE HAS BEEN ISSUED.
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 02:11:23 pm
No, we need to find ways to prevent Tarrans personality from running out!Now, I dare Ochita to take the test a second time. :PTHE CHALLENGE HAS BEEN ISSUED.
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 02:13:27 pm
Seriously, one day and I loose a point in neutrality and it doesn't move anywhere, it just disappears. At this rate I'll be out of personality in 25 days!No, we need to find ways to prevent Tarrans personality from running out!Now, I dare Ochita to take the test a second time. :PTHE CHALLENGE HAS BEEN ISSUED.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 02:15:20 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 02:16:12 pm
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 27, 2011, 02:16:58 pm
Spoiler: Chaotic Good (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 02:19:47 pm
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 02:23:34 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 02:25:01 pm
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 02:25:51 pm
I'm fairly certain that being tidally locked or not is dependent on Sol, not Earth.
Sol means sun in Danish, is this relevant?
Post by: The Doctor on February 27, 2011, 02:26:47 pm
Post by: scriver on February 27, 2011, 02:29:59 pm
Sol means sun in a lot of languages. Latin included.I'm fairly certain that being tidally locked or not is dependent on Sol, not Earth.
Sol means sun in Danish, is this relevant?
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 02:35:19 pm
o.o Danish?If you don't know what that is I'm gonna stare at you murderously and if you even think about suggesting that is is the capital of Ikea you WILL be submitted to dwarvenly experiments.
Sol means sun in a lot of languages. Latin included.I'm fairly certain that being tidally locked or not is dependent on Sol, not Earth.
Sol means sun in Danish, is this relevant?
Point hasn't changed, is it relevant? Or did the Sol mean somethin' completely else?
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 02:38:44 pm
and if you even think about suggesting that is is the capital of IkeaIt isn't?
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 02:40:47 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 02:44:16 pm
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on February 27, 2011, 02:45:46 pm
I'm fairly certain that being tidally locked or not is dependent on Sol, not Earth.
Sol means sun in Danish, is this relevant?
Yes - Sol and Luna's gravity are what cause the tides.
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 02:46:34 pm
Dude, whenever you're talking about planets, Sol almost always means the sun. In fact, nearly every time you hear Sol it means the sun, period.Sol means sun in a lot of languages. Latin included.I'm fairly certain that being tidally locked or not is dependent on Sol, not Earth.
Sol means sun in Danish, is this relevant?
Point hasn't changed, is it relevant? Or did the Sol mean somethin' completely else?
Well this thread has sure come a long way. (http://www.blogthings.com/whatlanguageshouldyoulearnquiz/)Meh, that quiz has far too little questions and options for my taste.
I just call the Sun "Sol" a lot because it sounds more like an actual name, even though it isn't. Just calling our star "Sun" and our moon "Moon" seems a bit unoriginal to me.Yeah, same here. Highly unoriginal. Also, you can't really call Sol the Sun when you've got multiple stars involved since "Sun" just means the star that is the center of the system in question.
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 02:47:44 pm
I just call the Sun "Sol" a lot because it sounds more like an actual name, even though it isn't. Just calling our star "Sun" and our moon "Moon" seems a bit unoriginal to me.You could call them "Charriot of Helios" and the "Gift of Selene"!
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 02:49:50 pm
Dude, whenever you're talking about planets, Sol almost always means the sun. In fact, nearly every time you hear Sol it means the sun, period.Sol means sun in a lot of languages. Latin included.I'm fairly certain that being tidally locked or not is dependent on Sol, not Earth.
Sol means sun in Danish, is this relevant?
Point hasn't changed, is it relevant? Or did the Sol mean somethin' completely else?
Dude, sorry I'm not studying.. Whatever the term for this stuff is.
Post by: Zrk2 on February 27, 2011, 02:52:48 pm
Well this thread has sure come a long way. (http://www.blogthings.com/whatlanguageshouldyoulearnquiz/)
Apparently I should learn Chinese.
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 02:55:02 pm
Do spanish people like to drink to an unreasonable degree? Because my language skills get better as the people around me get more drunk.
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 02:55:32 pm
Post by: Max White on February 27, 2011, 02:56:25 pm
Japanese here. And yeah, I should really start to learn that -_-
Desu. :D
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 27, 2011, 02:56:59 pm
Well this thread has sure come a long way. (http://www.blogthings.com/whatlanguageshouldyoulearnquiz/)I apparently should learn French.
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 02:57:49 pm
I got spanish.I know Danish and Dutch communicate better when drunk than when sober in their own languages. That's funny.
Do spanish people like to drink to an unreasonable degree? Because my language skills get better as the people around me get more drunk.
And I got french. WAT. I hate french, I think it's the ugliest language in europe :<
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 02:59:38 pm
And I got french. WAT. I hate french, I think it's the ugliest language in europe :<*Brofist*
Post by: Grimlocke on February 27, 2011, 03:16:54 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Must have been the sushi in the 3rd question.
Especialy that last sentence has nothing to do with the answers I put in.
Edit: Hah, isnt google ads just brilliant. It found out where I live and tries to sell me a course to learn my own language.
Post by: Cheeetar on February 27, 2011, 03:29:49 pm
Post by: Heron TSG on February 27, 2011, 04:18:49 pm
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:20:10 pm
I go to sleep and this happens... Give me a minute...Now, I dare Ochita to take the test a second time. :PTHE CHALLENGE HAS BEEN ISSUED.
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:25:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Test just now (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 04:27:27 pm
OCHITA STOLE MY NEUTRAL POINT. GET HIM! HE'S EVIL IN DISGUISE!
Post by: ToonyMan on February 27, 2011, 04:27:44 pm
I suppose it's a good thing that I should learn Japanese. I'm already trying to.Detective Lunge is so good he can become Japanese.
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 27, 2011, 04:29:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Funny enough, I found myself watching Lost in Translation yesterday, and Japan seems rather interesting; albiet it's through a movie's eyes. I'm hoping to actually go there sometime whenever I can afford to (my siblings have briefly visited there on a business trip, and even they said I would fit in easily or the people would like me quickly.). Of course, I really gotta commit to learning the language first if I expect to know how to navigate the places and culture. Nonetheless, Japan seems like an interesting place to check out.
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:31:00 pm
...Well, you haven't changed much, aside from getting lawfuller and gaining a point i-...No im not. I'm more purer than you.
OCHITA STOLE MY NEUTRAL POINT. GET HIM! HE'S EVIL IN DISGUISE!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 04:31:18 pm
...Well, you haven't changed much, aside from getting lawfuller and gaining a point i-...All glory and honor to Ochita the great, we worship you for we are not worthy of your greatness. We gladly watch as you rip the life from our Earth, for it is no less that we deserve. All glory and honor to Ochita the great...
OCHITA STOLE MY NEUTRAL POINT. GET HIM! HE'S EVIL IN DISGUISE!
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 04:36:34 pm
All glory and honor to Ochita the great, we worship you for we are not worthy of your greatness. We gladly watch as you rip the life from our Earth, for it is no less that we deserve. All glory and honor to Ochita the great...TRAITOR. I WILL BRING YOU DOWN WITH ME IF I DIE-I-I-IIIIII!
Oh god, getting colder... colder... cold... er. Someone... get me a blanket... please...
Post by: Lysabild on February 27, 2011, 04:37:59 pm
...Well, you haven't changed much, aside from getting lawfuller and gaining a point i-...All glory and honor to Ochita the great, we worship you for we are not worthy of your greatness. We gladly watch as you rip the life from our Earth, for it is no less that we deserve. All glory and honor to Ochita the great...
OCHITA STOLE MY NEUTRAL POINT. GET HIM! HE'S EVIL IN DISGUISE!
That sounds so enthusiastic! /Sarcasm off, I too think he stole the neutral point! I'm a go shine my pitchfork for some witch huntin'
Post by: Diablous on February 27, 2011, 04:39:25 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 27, 2011, 04:41:18 pm
True Neutral
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:48:01 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 27, 2011, 04:49:45 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 27, 2011, 04:50:39 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 27, 2011, 04:51:09 pm
Yes but I am good, while you are just neutral. Don't worry, Ochita forgives your sins.You are not good, you are evil. You are stealing my personality. What did I do to deserve this?!
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 04:52:34 pm
He didn't steal it. His goodness made you give it to him, and you, being the egotistical neutral bastard that you are, try to profit from him.Yes but I am good, while you are just neutral. Don't worry, Ochita forgives your sins.You are not good, you are evil. You are stealing my personality. What did I do to deserve this?!
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 04:53:00 pm
Its okay though. I forgive him.He didn't steal it. His goodness made you give it to him, and you, being the egotistical neutral bastard that you are, try to profit from him.Yes but I am good, while you are just neutral. Don't worry, Ochita forgives your sins.You are not good, you are evil. You are stealing my personality. What did I do to deserve this?!
Post by: Darvi on February 27, 2011, 04:54:23 pm
Post by: ToonyMan on February 27, 2011, 04:56:42 pm
Post by: Myroc on February 27, 2011, 05:31:50 pm
I am an asshole.Let's see,You sound like an asshole.I thinkI know that everyone else in existence is either A: An idiot or B: A total prick, which means I am the only person in the world that actually matters. Not to mention that I have questionable ethics and morals to begin with.
Yep, Chaotic Evil here.
Post by: Ochita on February 27, 2011, 05:32:54 pm
Chaos asshat. :PI am an asshole.Let's see,You sound like an asshole.I thinkI know that everyone else in existence is either A: An idiot or B: A total prick, which means I am the only person in the world that actually matters. Not to mention that I have questionable ethics and morals to begin with.
Yep, Chaotic Evil here.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 28, 2011, 01:07:13 am
Fitting, as I spent three semesters of high school trying to learn it.
Post by: Zangi on February 28, 2011, 10:43:15 am
Spoiler: True Neutral (click to show/hide)
Also, most of the questions demand an option that I am not aligned to... so I just choose the next best...
Post by: Ochita on February 28, 2011, 11:29:55 am
Post by: Zangi on February 28, 2011, 12:25:32 pm
I see that you are more evil than good...Apparently...
Want to be my arch-nemesis? or rival? I'll even show up at
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 12:30:00 pm
Spoiler: deets (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ochita on February 28, 2011, 12:30:10 pm
In response I will let you kill me, and then come back for real, and then I will forgive you, due to the powers that I have gained.
Post by: Bauglir on February 28, 2011, 12:51:31 pm
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 12:58:20 pm
So I got True Neutral. Sounds about right, because yay apathy. I felt guilty for a few of the answers, but honesty is honesty amirite?
Wow, you practically scored the same for everything but the Evil categories.
Post by: Ochita on February 28, 2011, 01:08:07 pm
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 28, 2011, 05:12:51 pm
Wow, retro is a Druid... Okay, time for class testing!Got you covered. (http://easydamus.com/character.html)
Post by: Darvi on February 28, 2011, 05:16:41 pm
Quote
I have extremely poor awareness of my surroundings.
I easily spot details that others miss.
Fuck. Both apply to me.
Post by: dwarfguy2 on February 28, 2011, 05:18:46 pm
Post by: Diablous on February 28, 2011, 05:26:44 pm
Wow, retro is a Druid... Okay, time for class testing!Got you covered. (http://easydamus.com/character.html)
Spoiler: Okay, done (click to show/hide)
Wizard, eh? Sounds about right.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 28, 2011, 05:29:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cecilff2 on February 28, 2011, 05:29:41 pm
Wow, retro is a Druid... Okay, time for class testing!Got you covered. (http://easydamus.com/character.html)
45. Animals...
...deserve our respect.
...are delicious.
AGH SO HARD
Post by: Darvi on February 28, 2011, 05:29:52 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Huh. My charisma doesn't seem to make up for the other's lack of it. And their Wis and Con seem to compensate for mine.
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 05:38:19 pm
Wow, retro is a Druid...
I... what? o_O
I got 'Chaotic Neutral Human Ranger/Sorcerer (2nd/1st Level)' on that class test, but I thought most of the questions were shit (took a long damn time too). Like, the options would be 'supernaturally bad - extremely bad - extremely good - supernaturally good.' There was one where two options were like "if i hit someone he wouldn't feel it" and the other two were like "HE WOULD DIE." Thought it was pretty poorly done overall. Pretty sure the same questions came up a few times but in different orders as well. So not much weight into this, though I did try and answer as accurately as I could given my options.
Spoiler: All the many, many details (click to show/hide)
e- Just really looked this stuff over. Apparently I was very nearly a gnome? And I didn't even score above 0 for anything but Ranger/Sorc.
Post by: Darvi on February 28, 2011, 05:48:42 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Didn't put in levels 'cause I'm not really sure of those.
Post by: Cecilff2 on February 28, 2011, 05:52:10 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I took this once before, and I think I got chaotic good human sorceror. In a more detailed test I took once(can't find it anymore), it picked me as chaotic good Avenger, which suits me well. First time I've ever seen a test think of me as elf though.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 28, 2011, 05:53:20 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Taricus on February 28, 2011, 05:54:46 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 05:55:47 pm
Spoiler: Meh. (click to show/hide)
One thing I disliked is that some of the questions had questions I couldn't really answer with the limited options.
Anyway, I was very nearly an half-elf. Not much of a surprise, really. What is surprising is that I'm far more good than when I last took the alignment test.
Post by: Bauglir on February 28, 2011, 06:06:28 pm
Post by: FuzzyZergling on February 28, 2011, 06:32:17 pm
Post by: Zangi on February 28, 2011, 06:42:51 pm
Yeah, lets go for it.After killing you, I will for some inexplicable reason feel depressed. Why did you have to die my nemesis? When you come back for real, I will have already temporarily joined forces with your former comrades. When you forgive me, I will leave, feeling a mix of relief and be next to tears. I will also be jealous of your new powers and will end up trying to find my own way.
In response I will let you kill me, and then come back for real, and then I will forgive you, due to the powers that I have gained.
Spoiler: True Neutral Human Ranger (3rd Level) (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 06:56:06 pm
Bay12 is full of wizards....We're also more elf than dwarf... I think that speaks for itself. Now people will have to contemplate killing elves more than they did before.
Post by: scriver on February 28, 2011, 06:58:17 pm
I also turned out to be a Monk. Related to how I thought Eastern religions were the best over and over again, perhaps? Strangely, that was the only class I had any plus points in, all the others were either nill or below.
Only 1 point away from both Elf or Halfling, though. Halfling monk would be nice. My nicest NWN1 character was one.
Spoiler: Resultoids (click to show/hide)
Post by: ECrownofFire on February 28, 2011, 07:01:36 pm
Oh, and 0 points in Evil.
Spoiler: Chaotic Good Elf Wizard (click to show/hide)
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 28, 2011, 07:41:10 pm
Spoiler: Not entirely what I expected (click to show/hide)
I can heal people, and destroy them with (almost) just as much force.
Post by: Darvi on February 28, 2011, 07:43:48 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 07:48:58 pm
Man is stronger than nature.
Nature is stronger than man.
Where the hell is "Man is Nature"
Stupid, stupid test.
Post by: sonerohi on February 28, 2011, 08:01:03 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 08:09:36 pm
Post by: Johnfalcon99977 on February 28, 2011, 08:46:49 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I have only one thing to say.
Lawful?
I agree generally with the most of the rest, but I see myself as neutral good. Hell, when I took the just alienment test, I got neutral good. I know i'm that too, because in all honesty, i'll only help the goverment if they are working for the purely good things, which doesn't happen as often as you might think! Lets just assume that i'm neutral good, ok?
Post by: CJ1145 on February 28, 2011, 08:54:21 pm
Spoiler: Shit, let's be Jung (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Shit, let's be doomed (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Shit, let's be Dante (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Shit, let's be Roleplayers (click to show/hide)
I'm surprised with the alignment one, in that I came off as Lawful Good. I was extremely close to Neutral Good, though, and I noticed I didn't get a single Evil point. Man, I'm just too nice a guy I guess.
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 08:54:52 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 09:00:29 pm
Ooh, where is roleplayer quiz to be found at?
Wow, retro is a Druid... Okay, time for class testing!Got you covered. (http://easydamus.com/character.html)
I'm curious as to what class Ochita is.
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 28, 2011, 09:05:08 pm
Lawful Good Paladin or Cleric, I bet.Ooh, where is roleplayer quiz to be found at?Wow, retro is a Druid... Okay, time for class testing!Got you covered. (http://easydamus.com/character.html)
I'm curious as to what class Ochita is.
Post by: Taricus on February 28, 2011, 09:08:03 pm
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 09:09:48 pm
(http://images.wikia.com/oots/images/8/83/V.png)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ricky on February 28, 2011, 09:18:32 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 09:30:30 pm
I for one got the medal of honor. No direct hits, no bitten bullets.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 28, 2011, 09:34:34 pm
Battleground God (http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/god.php)Sounds good to me. I'll deal with the poll once I can find the whole list of outcomes.
I for one got the medal of honor. No direct hits, no bitten bullets.
Post by: fqllve on February 28, 2011, 09:36:52 pm
Battleground God (http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/god.php)Me too. Now I have to go through and see what these bullets are.
I for one got the medal of honor. No direct hits, no bitten bullets.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 28, 2011, 09:38:16 pm
Also, I think we'll have to forgo the poll for this one.
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 09:39:34 pm
Also, I think we'll have to forgo the poll for this one.
Just do straight core 3.5 classes, ignore the rest. Let people pick which they identify more with if they got two.
e- haha oh wait i am so totally out of synch and talking about a different poll
Post by: ToonyMan on February 28, 2011, 09:39:34 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 09:40:18 pm
I've noticed from asking this on TwoCans that atheists almost always trip up on
Spoiler: Can't be giving you hints on where bullets are (click to show/hide)
Boy do they get mad too.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 28, 2011, 09:40:41 pm
I was typing of Battleground God, not the classes quiz.Also, I think we'll have to forgo the poll for this one.
Just do straight core 3.5 classes, ignore the rest. Let people pick which they identify more with if they got two.
Post by: Diablous on February 28, 2011, 09:41:38 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 28, 2011, 09:42:46 pm
Post by: fqllve on February 28, 2011, 09:43:57 pm
You gotsta say what they are too, man.
I've noticed from asking this on TwoCans that atheists almost always trip up onSpoiler: Can't be giving you hints on where bullets are (click to show/hide)
Boy do they get mad too.
I almost got tripped up on
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
as an atheist. But that was more comparing what I hold myself to and what I hold other people to.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 28, 2011, 09:44:29 pm
You gotsta say what they are too, man.The bitten bullet would be my acceptance of evolution based on the overwhelming, but not absolutely certain evidence in support of it contradicted by my belief that we require absolute evidence for God. I bit the bullet in saying that a higher standard of evidence is needed for God than evolution, which I considered justified due to extraordinary claims requiring extraordinary evidence.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 09:45:29 pm
Both of those were situations were Answering True or False both end up contradicting myself.
Son of a Bitch.
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 09:46:16 pm
Post by: Frelock on February 28, 2011, 09:49:05 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Seriously, what cleric could possibly get by with 10 wisdom?
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 09:49:44 pm
Battleground God (http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/god.php)
I for one got the medal of honor. No direct hits, no bitten bullets.
Quote
You've just taken a direct hit!
Earlier you agreed that it is rational to believe that the Loch Ness monster does not exist if there is an absence of strong evidence or argument that it does. No strong evidence or argument was required to show that the monster does not exist - absence of evidence or argument was enough. But now you claim that the atheist needs to be able to provide strong arguments or evidence if their belief in the non-existence of God is to be rational rather than a matter of faith.
The contradiction is that on the first ocassion (Loch Ness monster) you agreed that the absence of evidence or argument is enough to rationally justify belief in the non-existence of the Loch Ness monster, but on this occasion (God), you do not.[/b]
Objection! They asked for beleifs, not knoledge! Somebody can beleive in something reasonably without knowing it exists! It is reasonable for me to beleive what ever I want, as long as I do not let that convolute accepted fact. There is no proof for or against a god, therefor it isn't unreasonable to beleive he/she/it exists, but it is unreasonable to know for sure. This is opposed to the earlyer example, with Nessy. That was asking it is reasonable to assume knoledge of this monsters existance.
Quote
You've just bitten a bullet!
In saying that God has the freedom and power to do that which is logically impossible (like creating square circles), you are saying that any discussion of God and ultimate reality cannot be constrained by basic principles of rationality. This would seem to make rational discourse about God impossible. If rational discourse about God is impossible, there is nothing rational we can say about God and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or disbelief in God. To reject rational constraints on religious discourse in this fashion requires accepting that religious convictions, including your religious convictions, are beyond any debate or rational discussion. This is to bite a bullet.
Rationality is found by a measure of the natrual world, but god exists in a super natural world, thus why science can not measure of quantify any existance or lack of existance of a god. As such god, by bible definitions, and the definitions I got away with earlyer in the test, can do things that can not rationaly be done. But that isn't even needed for that question to be true, because god could just redefine what a squair, or 72 are in the human mind, keeping logic and reason intact, but changing human knoledge.
Quote
Congratulations!Well it feels good for winning an award for filling out a quiz on morals and reason when these things tend to be a little subjective, and I was never given a chance to explain myself. If I can't give my point, evidence and reasoning, it isn't a very fair test. I als object to this question.
You have been awarded the TPM service medal! This is our third highest award for outstanding service on the intellectual battleground.
The fact that you have progressed through this activity without suffering many hits and biting only one bullet suggests that whilst there are inconsistencies in your beliefs about God, on the whole they are well thought-out.
The direct hits you suffered occurred because some of your answers implied logical contradictions. The bitten bullet occurred because you responded in a way that required that you held a view that most people would have found strange, incredible or unpalatable. At the bottom of this page, we have reproduced the analyses of your direct hits and bitten bullet.
The fact that you did not suffer many hits and only bit one bullet means that you qualify for our third highest award. Well done!
Quote
People who die of horrible, painful diseases need to die in such a way for some higher purpose.Our immune system is our reward for billions upon billions of deaths by disease. Thank you evolution. So this question is a very, very grey topic. A natural system such as evolution could be seen as a higher purpose then human kind.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 09:51:51 pm
Explain?The one about God being able to Impossible Things, and the Serial Rapist with Inner Conviction.
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 09:53:28 pm
Yea, I spent a while on that one too. They are saying morals are absolute, and that this man was wrong despite the fact that he was only doing what he thought was right.Explain?The one about God being able to Impossible Things, and the Serial Rapist with Inner Conviction.
Forgot that one, thank you.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 28, 2011, 09:54:48 pm
EDIT:
Question 11 with the same health and feeling.
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 09:56:53 pm
Max White: Your explanation doesn't change anything. Saying God can create a burrito so hot even He can't eat it (Or square a circle, etc) still puts Him outside of human comprehension and renders any speculation equally futile. You can still think He can, it's not telling you it's wrong to think that, it's just saying that by allowing God that power you're leaving the realm of rational discourse.
Post by: Vertigon on February 28, 2011, 09:58:01 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 28, 2011, 09:58:52 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Objection! They asked for beleifs, not knoledge! Somebody can beleive in something reasonably without knowing it exists! It is reasonable for me to beleive what ever I want, as long as I do not let that convolute accepted fact. There is no proof for or against a god, therefor it isn't unreasonable to beleive he/she/it exists, but it is unreasonable to know for sure. This is opposed to the earlyer example, with Nessy. That was asking it is reasonable to assume knoledge of this monsters existance.I'm not sure what you mean. It says belief both times.
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 09:59:20 pm
The impossible things one is a little funky because some people class "Can do everything that is logically possible" as omnipotent.
Max White: Your explanation doesn't change anything. Saying God can create a burrito so hot even He can't eat it (Or square a circle, etc) still puts Him outside of human comprehension and renders any speculation equally futile. You can still think He can, it's not telling you it's wrong to think that, it's just saying that by allowing God that power you're leaving the realm of rational discourse.
But the realm of rational discourse lies very much within our own observations. If there was no gravity, and gravity was never observed, it wouldn't be rational to assume I would fall if I were to jump. Any god, however, would exist outside our realm of obsevation, and outside our realm of reason.
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 10:01:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: The Doctor on February 28, 2011, 10:04:13 pm
Just not AS much, at least in the whole Gawd thing.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 28, 2011, 10:06:39 pm
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 10:07:55 pm
Quote
Torturing innocent people is morally wrong.You know what? For me, it is morally wrong. This is fact. For somebody else, who thinks it is right to torture people, it is morally right. This is fact. However for just about everybody on earth by now, it is ethicaly wrong to torture people, me you and the guy who thinks it is ok.
You know those internet quizes set up by creationist websties that just about always end with you going to hell if you try to be honest? This feels like one of those.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 28, 2011, 10:09:40 pm
Actually I just say what I think isn't true.
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 10:10:19 pm
When it says "Torturing people is morally wrong" it means globally, regardless of what you think, torture is wrong.
It's not asking your opinion.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 28, 2011, 10:10:44 pm
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 10:14:26 pm
Hence, you bite the bullet and justify the rapist.
Hah, this is a weird sentence. Jeez, this quiz really needs the context.
I think that is actually almost a direct contradiction, though. If there were, say, very very strong evidence for God (as strong as the evidence for evolution, say - let's imagine that God wrote messages to us every night in the sky or something) then you should say that it's equally valid to believe in it as evolution. You have to bite a bullet because to maintain logical consistency you're saying that there is certain, irrevocable proof for evolution, I guess.
Not really, no. If we got messages in the sky, allegedly from God any without any other hypothetical explanation, I would say that belief in God and belief in evolution is equally valid. And of course, we don't. But that doesn't mean that I'm currently saying the proof for evolution is irrevocable. It's the best we've got, and certainly a lot more sensible than believing in a God to me. I just think it's unfair of the quiz to hold the two options to the same standards when the evidence supporting one is a lot more solid and rational than the 'evidence' supporting the other, despite neither being concrete or yet entirely disprovable.
e- blugh typo
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 10:19:46 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 10:20:58 pm
Not really, no. If we got messages in the sky, allegedly from God any without any other hypothetical explanation, I would say that belief in God and belief in evolution is equally valid.
So then you don't require incontrovertible proof, just a significant body of evidence, to justify belief in a deity.
Anybody want to necro the old religen thread, what ever that was?
Hell no.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 28, 2011, 10:21:09 pm
Time to
do
horrible
nOw
Post by: fqllve on February 28, 2011, 10:21:42 pm
But the realm of rational discourse lies very much within our own observations. If there was no gravity, and gravity was never observed, it wouldn't be rational to assume I would fall if I were to jump. Any god, however, would exist outside our realm of obsevation, and outside our realm of reason.
Not everyone believes that. For example, I believe that a god would have to exist solely within the realm of our experience to be meaningful, because otherwise we're speculating about things we could never possibly know. I understand that's part of the allure, but that just doesn't interest me.
And at the very least, any effect a god had on the universe would theoretically be measurable, even if steps were taken to prevent us from measuring it.
Post by: Derekristow on February 28, 2011, 10:22:25 pm
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 10:25:12 pm
Not everyone believes that. For example, I believe that a god would have to exist solely within the realm of our experience to be meaningful, because otherwise we're speculating about things we could never possibly know. I understand that's part of the allure, but that just doesn't interest me.
And at the very least, any effect a god had on the universe would theoretically be measurable, even if steps were taken to prevent us from measuring it.
"Not everybody believes" isn't a very good standard for telling somebody they are wrong.
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 10:26:35 pm
Spoiler: I did NOT see that coming. (click to show/hide)
Wow... sneaky one they pulled on me. Decided to pick the bite the bullet option.
Spoiler: I didn't see this one coming either (click to show/hide)
...Thing is, I would've gotten the question wrong either way, according to my answers earlier. Damn. Got me again. Took the direct hit.
Spoiler: Ehhhh? Oh... Wait... Wait... (click to show/hide)
Well, think of it, aliens could live on mars, just be in underground bunkers. But I guess they're right. Had to bite the bullet.
I mean, I said for a thing to be called god, it has to have the ability to do anything. If I was wrong here, I should've gotten a bullet back at that question.
Post by: sonerohi on February 28, 2011, 10:31:45 pm
Post by: Derekristow on February 28, 2011, 10:33:47 pm
I took 1 direct hit and bit 3 bullets. Reason for them is:Spoiler: I did NOT see that coming. (click to show/hide)
Wow... sneaky one they pulled on me. Decided to pick the bite the bullet option.
What? This doesn't make sense at all. Sure, he could make reduction of suffering a sin, but he wants to reduce suffering so he probably won't. If anyone was inconsistent there it was God.
Spoiler: I didn't see this one coming either (click to show/hide)
...Thing is, I would've gotten the question wrong either way, according to my answers earlier. Damn. Got me again. Took the direct hit.
I mean, I said for a thing to be called god, it has to have the ability to do anything. If I was wrong here, I should've gotten a bullet back at that question.
These two seem a bit off and are easily argued. See above conversation.
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 10:35:00 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on February 28, 2011, 10:35:22 pm
Not really, no. If we got messages in the sky, allegedly from God any without any other hypothetical explanation, I would say that belief in God and belief in evolution is equally valid. And of course, we don't. But that doesn't mean that I'm currently saying the proof for evolution is irrevocable. It's the best we've got, and certainly a lot more sensible than believing in a God to me. I just think it's unfair of the quiz to hold the two options to the same standards when the evidence supporting one is a lot more solid and rational than the 'evidence' supporting the other, despite neither being concrete or yet entirely disprovable.Reread the question. It's saying "without irrevocable proof". Therefore, if you say "true", then you're saying "if there's anything less than absolute proof, you should not believe in God" but that "it's ok to believe in evolution without absolute proof". It's completely irrelevant what things are like in the real world - unintentionally or not, answering those 2 questions that way is an inconsistency. The only way to resolve it is to say that there's absolute proof for evolution, which is seen as biting the bullet.
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 10:38:48 pm
Not really, no. If we got messages in the sky, allegedly from God any without any other hypothetical explanation, I would say that belief in God and belief in evolution is equally valid.So then you don't require incontrovertible proof, just a significant body of evidence, to justify belief in a deity.
If there was pretty-solid-but-not-totally-concrete evidence that a God existed, yeah, I'd think it justifiable. I wouldn't find it valid myself, but I'd think other people would be justified in saying so. Right now I just see it as this weird useless old tradition with a million different branches that all retroactively change themselves to accommodate new scientific findings without actually having any leg to stand on proof-wise, and I can understand why people believe in it, but I don't think it's really justifiable at all through a rational perspective.
Reread the question. It's saying "without irrevocable proof". Therefore, if you say "true", then you're saying "if there's anything less than absolute proof, you should not believe in God" but that "it's ok to believe in evolution without absolute proof". It's completely irrelevant what things are like in the real world - unintentionally or not, answering those 2 questions that way is an inconsistency. The only way to resolve it is to say that there's absolute proof for evolution, which is seen as biting the bullet.
I don't think they're two things that can be held to the same standards. I'm going to direct you to what Derekristow said because I think his phrasing is pretty spot-on:
Continuing on the God-Evolution gotcha, the existence of a god and the theory of evolution are two entirely different things. A god's existence would be a statement of fact, he's either there or he isn't. Evolution is a theory, and thus is almost expected to be at least somewhat imperfect. It best fits what we know, so we think it's true.
Post by: Aqizzar on February 28, 2011, 10:39:11 pm
Looks like a buncha personality tests too. I'll have to check this out, I always love hearing a website talk about myself.
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 10:42:49 pm
Post by: Korbac on February 28, 2011, 10:45:18 pm
Post by: fqllve on February 28, 2011, 10:45:39 pm
"Not everybody believes" isn't a very good standard for telling somebody they are wrong.
That's because I wasn't saying you were wrong. I was just pointing out it isn't necessary to believe that any god exists outside our experience. It's hard to be wrong about a concept such as god. Very few people's definitions agree.
Post by: Leafsnail on February 28, 2011, 10:46:03 pm
I don't think they're two things that can be held to the same standards. I'm going to direct you to what Derekristow said because I think his phrasing is pretty spot-on:The problem isn't "You believe in evolution but don't believe in god". It has nothing to do with the relative likeliness of either of them in the real world.Continuing on the God-Evolution gotcha, the existence of a god and the theory of evolution are two entirely different things. A god's existence would be a statement of fact, he's either there or he isn't. Evolution is a theory, and thus is almost expected to be at least somewhat imperfect. It best fits what we know, so we think it's true.
The problem is "You're prepared to believe evolution if there's very, very good evidence for it (for the sake of argument, let's say that it's almost perfect) but you would say it's irrational to believe in God if there was very, very good evidence for it (again, almost perfect)".
It's occured to me that there's actually a second way of resolving this - saying that your own belief in evolution is irrational. I don't think that's a very good solution though :P.
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 10:47:49 pm
I took 1 direct hit and bit 3 bullets. Reason for them is:Spoiler: I did NOT see that coming. (click to show/hide)
Wow... sneaky one they pulled on me. Decided to pick the bite the bullet option.
What? This doesn't make sense at all. Sure, he could make reduction of suffering a sin, but he wants to reduce suffering so he probably won't. If anyone was inconsistent there it was God.
It's inconsistent, because the question is asking if God must want a reduction of suffering. Key word being "must". If an effectively omnipotent (Effectively meaning constrained by logic) being wants x==true, then there is no logical reason for x!=true. In other words, it is impossible for a god who must want the reduction of suffering to make the reduction of suffering a bad thing.
If there was pretty-solid-but-not-totally-concrete evidence that a God existed, yeah, I'd think it justifiable. I wouldn't find it valid myself, but I'd think other people would be justified in saying so. Right now I just see it as this weird useless old tradition with a million different branches that all retroactively change themselves to accommodate new scientific findings without actually having any leg to stand on proof-wise, and I can understand why people believe in it, but I don't think it's really justifiable at all through a rational perspective.
Then you don't require proof to justify belief in a deity any more than you require proof to justify belief in evolution. Your answer to the "Is it justifiable to believe in God without proof" question didn't actually represent what you believe. You're internally consistent. Gratz bro
Post by: sonerohi on February 28, 2011, 10:54:05 pm
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 10:55:10 pm
Post by: Lysabild on February 28, 2011, 10:58:24 pm
If you take a disk, and draw a line through it and say one half is atheist, one if theist, then take the atheit and split into atheist and agnostic again, your done. Then you take the theistic side and split into all religions that exist, then you split all those religions into their brances and last their cults, now, what exactly is the chance left that your way of reading this book that can be proven written by roman men for power grapples, is right?
Needless to say, faith is fine, religion is bullshit. Imho. I don't hate religious people, in most cases they're fluffy.
Post by: ToonyMan on February 28, 2011, 11:00:47 pm
Pfffff hahahahahaaaaaa
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 11:04:17 pm
This is just so much fun (http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/)
Wow, yeah. This might be the rest of my night right here.
Leafsnail, sorry man, but I'm just going to drop the debate. I don't think either of us are going to get anywhere and I didn't really think I'd be getting into a debate about logical consistency in religious belief tonight :\
Post by: GlyphGryph on February 28, 2011, 11:06:34 pm
0 hits, 0 bullets on the god test. ^_^
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 11:07:18 pm
Taboo quiz is pretty interesting. I got the very bottom left corner of the grid.
I got 0.04 On universalizing because I said it was Kinda wrong for the Dude to break his promise to his mother, which it is said he feels guilty about and therefore isn't my opinion but his.
Sigh
Post by: ToonyMan on February 28, 2011, 11:08:04 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on February 28, 2011, 11:08:27 pm
Spoiler: Class/Alignment Results (click to show/hide)
I didn't expect this.
Spoiler: Taboo results (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Battleground God (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dragooble on February 28, 2011, 11:12:53 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 11:18:08 pm
Spoiler: My Morality Play result (click to show/hide)
I'm interested in what you guys will get.
Post by: Cthulhu on February 28, 2011, 11:18:49 pm
Post by: fqllve on February 28, 2011, 11:19:46 pm
Quote
Your God is the sustainer of all that is. This means that if God ceased to exist so would everything else.
The metaphysical engineers are finding it hard to model this God in our universe. The laws of physics do not seem to require that the universe has anything outside of itself to continue to exist. Therefore, they can't quite see what kind of evidence it would be possible to point to in order to come to the belief that God is required for the universe to continue.
Well duh! That's because my definition of god is the universe. I think I deserve 1.0 and not 0.9 plausibility, thank you.
Post by: Dragooble on February 28, 2011, 11:23:14 pm
There aren't varying amounts of proof. If it isn't 100% it's not proof. There is no proof for evolution and there is no proof for God. If you say that evolution is true you are justifying that belief on evidence, not proof. The other question is, in effect, saying "It is only justifiable to believe in God if there is no room for doubt, and it is 100% confirmed that God exists" If you say that's true then you're being logically inconsistent.I meant evidence, not proof sorry. And I realize where the rational inconsistency comes in here. I was just not reading it carefully enough, because it's a quick internet quiz.
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 11:24:51 pm
Quote
The Report
Plausibility Quotient = 1.0
The metaphysical engineers have determined that your conception of God has a plausibility quotient (PQ) of 1.0. A PQ of 1.0 means that as far as the metaphysical engineers can determine your conception of God is internally consistent and consistent with the universe that we live in. A PQ of 0.0 means that it is neither internally consistent nor consistent with our universe. More than likely, your PQ score will be somewhere between these two figures. But remember that this is your PQ score as determined by the metaphysical engineers. The editors of TPM have no control over their deliberations, so don't blame us!
What kind of God is that!?
The metaphysical engineers are happy to report that, to the best of their knowledge, the God you conceive is internally consistent and could exist in our universe. But they are less sure that what you have described deserves the name of God. She is not, for example, all-powerful. A God which knows everything or is totally benign may be a wonderful ideal, but is she really a God unless she has ultimate power?
We suspect that your God is not the traditional God of the Christian, Jewish or Muslim faiths.
That is the end of the metaphysical engineers' report. As we said at the beginning, we are not sure that the problems they identify are insuperable. But we do hope that by thinking about them you may come to understand what you mean by God more deeply, and perhaps even revise your former beliefs.
My gawd got it going on.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on February 28, 2011, 11:25:23 pm
Spoiler: Taboo (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: DIY Deity (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on February 28, 2011, 11:28:27 pm
Spoiler: Taboo (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dragooble on February 28, 2011, 11:29:00 pm
Spoiler: Taboo (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: AW MAH GAWD (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 11:34:15 pm
Spoiler: Tabooze (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 11:35:48 pm
Post by: Tarran on February 28, 2011, 11:40:33 pm
Post by: Max White on February 28, 2011, 11:44:23 pm
Seriously... Sex with frozen dead chickens? That's literally the only one I thought was wrong to be morally normal in a country since... seriously. Sex with a dead frozen Chicken. What the hell. I would be alright with almost everything else, but that's just... wrong, on so, so many other levels compared to the other questions.Oh, so we eat things not normaly eatern, we can have sexual intercorse not normaly sextern (Ha awesome word!) and we can disrespect the dead, but we can't do all three at once? Is there a limit to the number of bizaar acts we can pull before it gets immoral?
Post by: Realmfighter on February 28, 2011, 11:45:41 pm
Seriously... Sex with frozen dead chickens? That's literally the only one I thought was wrong to be morally normal in a country since... seriously. Sex with a dead frozen Chicken. What the hell. I would be alright with almost everything else, but that's just... wrong, on so, so many other levels compared to the other questions.(http://www.philosophersnet.com/images/chicken.gif)
Post by: Retro on February 28, 2011, 11:50:48 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 01, 2011, 12:04:07 am
(1) I think that's okay, since everyone is different and I wouldn't mind if it was normal to have people eating fried scorpions. Human flesh, I would think is slightly immorally wrong if with the consent of the person being eaten, seriously wrong if without.Seriously... Sex with frozen dead chickens? That's literally the only one I thought was wrong to be morally normal in a country since... seriously. Sex with a dead frozen Chicken. What the hell. I would be alright with almost everything else, but that's just... wrong, on so, so many other levels compared to the other questions.Oh, so we eat things not normaly eatern(1), we can have sexual intercorse not normaly sextern (Ha awesome word!)(2) and we can disrespect the dead(3), but we can't do all three at once? Is there a limit to the number of bizaar acts we can pull before it gets immoral?
(2) I think that it's okay if both members give their consent. I also think it's okay for it to be normal under those conditions. Also, this is sex with other, live humans, not dead chickens. Big difference.
(3) I think it's wrong for the individual at the individual level if they made a promise and break it, but I don't think it's wrong for a country to have it as a norm.
Post by: Qinetix on March 01, 2011, 12:27:51 am
Introverted:22 Intuitive:25 Thinking:50 Judging:22
I am:
slightly expressed introvert
moderately expressed intuitive personality
moderately expressed thinking personality
slightly expressed judging personality
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 12:29:24 am
My tests results.. :
Introverted:22 Intuitive:25 Thinking:50 Judging:22
I am:
slightly expressed introvert
moderately expressed intuitive personality
moderately expressed thinking personality
slightly expressed judging personality
What the hell are you on about?
Oh yea, that. Cool.
Post by: Heliman on March 01, 2011, 12:38:18 am
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 12:44:30 am
Post by: Cheeetar on March 01, 2011, 12:48:06 am
Although this thread has a habit of going off in other tangents with easy. (http://www.bbspot.com/news/2006/08/language_quiz.php)
I am Visual Basic. Alas.
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 12:50:01 am
You enjoy the World Wide Web. You are constantly changing the way you do things, and this tends to confuse people who work with you.
Aww shit.
Post by: Realmfighter on March 01, 2011, 12:51:46 am
You enjoy looking for different ways to solve a problem. You take longer to solve them, but usually come up with more than one solution.
What the hell is Prolog
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 12:54:36 am
Post by: Osmosis Jones on March 01, 2011, 12:58:56 am
Is one nation worse morally if they are secret chicken shaggers; yes/no?
This is too black and white; if they shag chickens that ONLY they (or someone who knows and agrees with the action) eats, then fine, but if people are unwittingly made to eat sex-chicken, that's just wrong. Dammit quiz, let me be specific!
Also, god-quiz only got me with the evolution/god proof thing, and thats simply because I feel they have far different implications on life, and thus deserve different levels of proof. Having a god means the possibility of an afterlife, a meaning behind existence beyond chance, and more. Evolution I feel has a much smaller impact on our lives beyond what already has been proven (as in, something very much like evolution will occur regardless).
Post by: Tarran on March 01, 2011, 01:04:59 am
Although this thread has a habit of going off in other tangents with easy. (http://www.bbspot.com/news/2006/08/language_quiz.php)That quiz has some crap questions and crap answers. :-\
Anyway, I'm C# apparently. Likely due to some questions I couldn't answer the way I wanted. Until I googled it, I had no idea what the heck C# was.
"You are C#. No matter how hard you try, you can't convince people that you are unique. You're composed of others' traits."
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 01:08:11 am
Post by: Ochita on March 01, 2011, 02:25:56 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 02:45:43 am
Post by: Ochita on March 01, 2011, 02:46:24 am
Post by: Aqizzar on March 01, 2011, 02:48:01 am
Spoiler: Hey, why not post the whole thing. (click to show/hide)
This is the first D&D Alignment test I've taken that didn't come back Chaotic Evil, but apparently I was always pretty borderline on the Neutral Corner. Dual-classing is for twinks and LARPers, so I'd rather ditch for pure Sorcerer, since that's borderline too. So yeah, I guess I'm hovering somewhere between Neutral Evil Half-Elf Bard/Sorcerer Twinkmachine and my older results of Chaotic Evil Human Sorcerer. I'm pretty solidly generic villain material.
I'll have to try the other testydoos when I'm less knackered.
Post by: Ochita on March 01, 2011, 02:49:22 am
Post by: Aqizzar on March 01, 2011, 03:11:56 am
God test gave me two bitten bullets and no direct hits. One was that I require a higher standard of proof for belief in God than in evolution, which I consider perfectly acceptable. To wit, one is believing in observable genetic drift, the other is believing in a thinking deity outside the bounds of time and physics. The other bullet was-
Quote
In saying that God has the freedom and power to do that which is logically impossible (like creating square circles), you are saying that any discussion of God and ultimate reality cannot be constrained by basic principles of rationality. This would seem to make rational discourse about God impossible. If rational discourse about God is impossible, there is nothing rational we can say about God and nothing rational we can say to support our belief or disbelief in God. To reject rational constraints on religious discourse in this fashion requires accepting that religious convictions, including your religious convictions, are beyond any debate or rational discussion. This is to bite a bullet.
I would contend that not being bound by the basic principles of what we in this universe understand to be "rationality" is exactly what defines God, and that the assumption is necessary to truly understand and discuss God. It's perfectly possibly to have a rational discourse on subjects which are in and of themselves irrational. Therefor, the basic premise of the bullet is total bunk.
Post by: Lysabild on March 01, 2011, 03:14:55 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hehehehe
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 03:32:44 am
16 is probably the max, so I think you're tied for it a few times.Spoiler: Hey, why not post the whole thing. (click to show/hide)
This is the first D&D Alignment test I've taken that didn't come back Chaotic Evil, but apparently I was always pretty borderline on the Neutral Corner. Dual-classing is for twinks and LARPers, so I'd rather ditch for pure Sorcerer, since that's borderline too. So yeah, I guess I'm hovering somewhere between Neutral Evil Half-Elf Bard/Sorcerer Twinkmachine and my older results of Chaotic Evil Human Sorcerer. I'm pretty solidly generic villain material.
I'll have to try the other testydoos when I'm less knackered.
Oh god, it's an evil red mage with higher buff/debuff ability. Assuming he is capable of gathering followers we might be doomed, were it not for the fact that there is some sort of artifact that can surly destroy him.
Post by: dwarfguy2 on March 01, 2011, 08:23:15 am
Post by: Zangi on March 01, 2011, 08:35:57 am
Spoiler: Taboo(Its the same as half of B12...) (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jopax on March 01, 2011, 08:48:38 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Myroc on March 01, 2011, 08:52:44 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Looking over it, I didn't even get a single point on the good scale, which I even got on the other alignment test. Which is a bit surprising since even though I am a man of less reputable ethics, I'm don't consider myself a complete asshole.
Post by: 3 on March 01, 2011, 09:01:06 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
What I'd do as a mage with an ability roll like that I don't know.
Post by: Tellemurius on March 01, 2011, 09:09:23 am
Post by: Zangi on March 01, 2011, 09:14:38 am
Also, evil is a label that do-gooders oppress upon people who think differently.
Post by: dwarfguy2 on March 01, 2011, 09:17:54 am
Battle-Mage?...No, I'm pretty much pure evil. As well as Black Mage. And The Lich King. OH! There's also Wilfre. Wait what were we talking about?
Also, evil is a label that do-gooders oppress upon people who think differently.
Post by: RedKing on March 01, 2011, 09:56:38 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
w00t...that Int score gets me extra spells (or does that still apply....haven't touched AD&D since 2nd edition). Not all that surprised, although I would have expected a bit less "anti-monk-ness" in my score, considering my general affability towards religion and the fact that I seriously considered entering a monastery in my early 20's.
Post by: Taricus on March 01, 2011, 09:57:57 am
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 09:58:26 am
prepare to be obliterated by the better magic class. :PBah! ):<
Bloody self-hating elves... :DWhat about half elves who don't like elves?
Monks generally aren't religious per se.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
w00t...that Int score gets me extra spells (or does that still apply....haven't touched AD&D since 2nd edition). Not all that surprised, although I would have expected a bit less "anti-monk-ness" in my score, considering my general affability towards religion and the fact that I seriously considered entering a monastery in my early 20's.
Post by: Taricus on March 01, 2011, 09:59:32 am
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 10:08:36 am
Post by: RedKing on March 01, 2011, 10:10:07 am
Oh yeah....guess I'm thinking of Rolemaster (which seperated the martial-arts monks out as "Warrior Monk", as opposed to the religious ascetic "Monk" class).Monks generally aren't religious per se.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
w00t...that Int score gets me extra spells (or does that still apply....haven't touched AD&D since 2nd edition). Not all that surprised, although I would have expected a bit less "anti-monk-ness" in my score, considering my general affability towards religion and the fact that I seriously considered entering a monastery in my early 20's.
Post by: Ochita on March 01, 2011, 10:35:54 am
Post by: Leafsnail on March 01, 2011, 10:52:20 am
Post by: Zangi on March 01, 2011, 11:08:26 am
I actually think the taboo one needs a "Do you believe in an afterlife" option. Because if you do, then you may legitimately think there's something wrong with the "breaking promise to mother" or "having sex with dead chicken" even if you're fine with any private, nonharming act.
Eh, its all about the 'morality' of it. It doesn't need a 'do you believe in an afterlife' option. You would have taken that into account if it meant anything to you. Either way... You can still be of 'good morale character' despite doing all/some of that.
Its just other people can find it despicable and get all up in your business about how you conduct your own life.
Post by: RedKing on March 01, 2011, 11:12:15 am
I actually think the taboo one needs a "Do you believe in an afterlife" option. Because if you do, then you may legitimately think there's something wrong with the "breaking promise to mother" or "having sex with dead chicken" even if you're fine with any private, nonharming act.
No. I don't particularly believe in an afterlife, and I'm just not okay with chicken-f*cking.
Post by: Leafsnail on March 01, 2011, 11:25:57 am
Eh, its all about the 'morality' of it. It doesn't need a 'do you believe in an afterlife' option. You would have taken that into account if it meant anything to you. Either way... You can still be of 'good morale character' despite doing all/some of that.Yeah, I don't think there's anything morally inconsistent about just not liking people to have sex with chickens or lieing about going to your mothers grave (actually, this is the only one I put down as "a bit wrong". This would make me much more angry than the chicken one) without believing in an afterlife. But doing so means you can't tick "I don't think it can be wrong if it harms nobody" without causing an inconsistency. An afterlife option would mean that, in both cases, you could say that the case does actually harm someone.
Post by: Cthulhu on March 01, 2011, 11:56:17 am
Post by: Zangi on March 01, 2011, 11:59:34 am
Humans are all about being inconsistent and hypocritical?Eh, its all about the 'morality' of it. It doesn't need a 'do you believe in an afterlife' option. You would have taken that into account if it meant anything to you. Either way... You can still be of 'good morale character' despite doing all/some of that.Yeah, I don't think there's anything morally inconsistent about just not liking people to have sex with chickens or lieing about going to your mothers grave (actually, this is the only one I put down as "a bit wrong". This would make me much more angry than the chicken one) without believing in an afterlife. But doing so means you can't tick "I don't think it can be wrong if it harms nobody" without causing an inconsistency. An afterlife option would mean that, in both cases, you could say that the case does actually harm someone.
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 12:14:03 pm
Post by: warhammer651 on March 01, 2011, 02:06:33 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lysabild on March 01, 2011, 02:37:09 pm
Post by: Zangi on March 01, 2011, 02:45:49 pm
All you sorcerer and wizards, I should get started on some good backstabbin' and pick pocketin' here!Seems pretty obvious we'd be top heavy in the magery department....
Its like a broken MMO, Magicking is more powerful/easier to play in both PvP and PvE. Everyone wants to be em. "Apply heat till they are dust!"
Post by: RedKing on March 01, 2011, 02:47:37 pm
Post by: Cecilff2 on March 01, 2011, 02:57:33 pm
All you sorcerer and wizards, I should get started on some good backstabbin' and pick pocketin' here!
Us stealth types would do well methinks.
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 02:59:05 pm
Post by: Lysabild on March 01, 2011, 03:02:57 pm
Nothing to pickpocket here 'cept for my spoons :3
You don't have any spoons.
Anymore that is.
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 03:04:32 pm
What you got are automated sporks. With built in anti-theft mechanisms.
Post by: Diablous on March 01, 2011, 03:25:00 pm
Spoiler: Programming language quiz from earlier (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on March 01, 2011, 03:51:14 pm
I'm a bard, I always have spoons :3
What you got are automated sporks. With built in anti-theft mechanisms.
(http://paizo.com/image/avatar/Avatar_Elan.jpg)
Post by: Darvi on March 01, 2011, 03:52:51 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on March 01, 2011, 06:29:50 pm
1. Considering the 'extraordinary claims/extraordinary evidence' line is usually employed by super-rationalist types who tend not to give much weight to anything that isn't measurable, it's interesting how they fail to realize how subjective the notion of an extraordinary claim is. Most religious types believe that evolution is actually the more extraordinary claim mostly on the basis that it goes against traditional beliefs. For the record, I don't see religious perspectives as employing a good standard of measure here, but I still think it's worth point out that there is subjectivity here.
2. I think what trips people up the most is the amount of evidence and observational consistency that evolution has going for it vs religion. Neither has absolute proof of the truth or accuracy of its claims, but one definitely has more going for it than another.
Where X is absolutely proven to be true and accurate
Evolution
------------------------------------> X
Religion
-> X
Evolutionists look at it this way and think "Evolution doesn't need as much proof as religion to be an acceptable idea." Where really they should require the same amount of evidence, but one has simply had more success than the other. I think our minds want to mistakenly interpret the question as "How much more evidence is required for the idea to be absolutely proven."
And on the frozen chicken sex thing.... I've actually seen a video of this... regrettably.... I really really really wish I hadn't.... but it can't be unseen. Just wanted to share my pain with you guys since the subject came up. I don't think there's anything morally wrong with it. I just wish I hadn't seen it.
I know someone's going to ask why. I know some extremely perverted people, my wife included. She's actually responsible for this one. Some people will give no second thoughts to absorbing the most fucked up shit they can manage to find.
Post by: Puzzlemaker on March 01, 2011, 07:59:51 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 01, 2011, 08:06:39 pm
I don't want to have to dig through this thread, so... what frozen chicken thing?The Taboo quiz asks you what you think is morally wrong. One of the questions involves a man having sex with a dead frozen chicken, then cooking it, then eating it, and having no regrets and no after-effects in the future.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 01, 2011, 08:30:22 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on March 01, 2011, 09:25:16 pm
Have any of you done the Brave New World "test"?Yes. I got the-
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on March 02, 2011, 12:42:16 am
Spoiler: D&D Character Quiz (click to show/hide)
Bullshit quiz is bullshit.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote from: Taboo quiz
Your Moralising Quotient is: 0.00.
Your Interference Factor is: 0.00.
Your Universalising Factor is: -1.
Post by: Lysabild on March 02, 2011, 12:58:22 am
This thread had been through some interesting stuff. Just caught up on like 20 pages worth. I'd like to comment on the whole extraordinary claims/amount of proof needed for god vs evolution thing.
1. Considering the 'extraordinary claims/extraordinary evidence' line is usually employed by super-rationalist types who tend not to give much weight to anything that isn't measurable, it's interesting how they fail to realize how subjective the notion of an extraordinary claim is. Most religious types believe that evolution is actually the more extraordinary claim mostly on the basis that it goes against traditional beliefs. For the record, I don't see religious perspectives as employing a good standard of measure here, but I still think it's worth point out that there is subjectivity here.
2. I think what trips people up the most is the amount of evidence and observational consistency that evolution has going for it vs religion. Neither has absolute proof of the truth or accuracy of its claims, but one definitely has more going for it than another.
Where X is absolutely proven to be true and accurate
Evolution
------------------------------------> X
Religion
-> X
Evolutionists look at it this way and think "Evolution doesn't need as much proof as religion to be an acceptable idea." Where really they should require the same amount of evidence, but one has simply had more success than the other. I think our minds want to mistakenly interpret the question as "How much more evidence is required for the idea to be absolutely proven."
And on the frozen chicken sex thing.... I've actually seen a video of this... regrettably.... I really really really wish I hadn't.... but it can't be unseen. Just wanted to share my pain with you guys since the subject came up. I don't think there's anything morally wrong with it. I just wish I hadn't seen it.
I know someone's going to ask why. I know some extremely perverted people, my wife included. She's actually responsible for this one. Some people will give no second thoughts to absorbing the most fucked up shit they can manage to find.
To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure, to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy.
Wish I could remember where I got the quote, but damn it's awesome finding these bits of truth this well formed.
Post by: ECrownofFire on March 02, 2011, 04:48:55 am
Bullshit quiz is bullshit.Allow me to explain the contradictions, then.Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
1. This has been discussed many times. Ever hear of such things as the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Evolution is not proven 100%. For all we know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster could have done something and made it appear as though evolution is true. You have to understand that even gravity is still a theory, no matter what you may think. Evolution does have evidence in favor of it, but nothing completely and utterly irrefutable.
2. What, exactly, are those arguments? There are no definite arguments against any kind of god. You can argue all you like, but theists and atheists have zero completely irrefutable proof either way. There are certainly arguments against specific things about specific gods, but the overall idea of a god remains viable regardless.
3. Under such a system where a god could do such a thing (logical impossibilities), there ARE no underlying laws. With no underlying laws, then it is utterly ridiculous to even begin to discuss a god, much less the existence of it. Attempting to explain something illogical using logic is illogical in itself. By arguing that a god could be illogical, then you cannot logically say that you do or do not believe in such a thing. That is the position of ignosticism, by the way.
Post by: Osmosis Jones on March 02, 2011, 05:15:30 am
Again, there are compelling arguments and evidence against the existence of a higher power (including the complete and utter absence of evidence to the contrary). If there were not, it would be a matter of faith.
More, there are no compelling arguments FOR the existence of a higher power, rather than anything strongly against. Well, unless you count Occam's Razor, but even that's more a guideline than a hard and fast rule. As CoF says though, there are plenty of arguments against specific interpretations of a higher power.
Post by: SalmonGod on March 02, 2011, 06:01:27 am
Post by: Osmosis Jones on March 02, 2011, 09:48:17 am
That's not to say we should give carte blanche to any non-abrahamic religion, merely that to an external observer, our arguments (because let's not lie, there's no such thing as a religious debate ::) ) would seem even more comical than usual.
So, lets get back to the frozen chicken loving :)
Post by: Keita on March 02, 2011, 09:50:09 am
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on March 02, 2011, 12:21:48 pm
Allow me to explain the contradictions, then.A matter of semantics. The abstract concept of evolution is demonstrably true. We can sit down and test the mechanisms and principles of it. It is evolution as the origin of modern life that is almost irrefutably proven, enough so that it is deeply irrational to go against it.
1. This has been discussed many times. Ever hear of such things as the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Evolution is not proven 100%. For all we know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster could have done something and made it appear as though evolution is true. You have to understand that even gravity is still a theory, no matter what you may think. Evolution does have evidence in favor of it, but nothing completely and utterly irrefutable.
Quote
2. What, exactly, are those arguments? There are no definite arguments against any kind of god. You can argue all you like, but theists and atheists have zero completely irrefutable proof either way. There are certainly arguments against specific things about specific gods, but the overall idea of a god remains viable regardless.Result of question 10: "Complete lack of evidence for A is compelling evidence against A."
Result of question whatever-the-fuck-number-it-was: "If there is not compelling evidence against B, then disbelief in B is a matter of faith."
Reason they don't contradict: "There is no evidence for B, therefore the lack of evidence is compelling evidence against its existence, therefore disbelief in it is not a matter of faith, but of reason."
Quote
3. Under such a system where a god could do such a thing (logical impossibilities), there ARE no underlying laws. With no underlying laws, then it is utterly ridiculous to even begin to discuss a god, much less the existence of it. Attempting to explain something illogical using logic is illogical in itself. By arguing that a god could be illogical, then you cannot logically say that you do or do not believe in such a thing. That is the position of ignosticism, by the way.The concept of a deity is already irrational. Its very existence would already break logic, and were it all-powerful it could create things which violate those laws which you are familiar with.
Post by: RedKing on March 02, 2011, 12:55:31 pm
Allow me to explain the contradictions, then.A matter of semantics. The abstract concept of evolution is demonstrably true. We can sit down and test the mechanisms and principles of it. It is evolution as the origin of modern life that is almost irrefutably proven, enough so that it is deeply irrational to go against it.
1. This has been discussed many times. Ever hear of such things as the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Evolution is not proven 100%. For all we know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster could have done something and made it appear as though evolution is true. You have to understand that even gravity is still a theory, no matter what you may think. Evolution does have evidence in favor of it, but nothing completely and utterly irrefutable.
Newtonian mechanics are demonstrably true too...at a certain scale. At other scales (the subatomic and the cosmological), they break down. Does this mean that Newtonian mechanics are false? Not exactly. It's more accurate to say that Newtonian mechanics are a very close approximation of "reality" except at the extreme ends of the mathematical domain it resides in.
Likewise, Darwinian evolution--as we currently know and describe it--may be an accurate approximation, but could conceivably not hold true at the extremes.
Post by: Leafsnail on March 02, 2011, 01:08:33 pm
Why did you concede a hit? If you think there's irrefutable proof for evolution, you should just bite the bullet instead. That means that the authors think your view is odd, but consistent.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's actually completely irrelevant whether there are compelling arguments for atheism or not. The question is asking what the case would be if there was no compelling evidence. You said that a-Lochnessmonsterism is a logical view to take if there's an absence of evidence, but that atheism would not be a logical view to take if there was an absence of evidence. That is a contradiction.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on March 02, 2011, 01:24:05 pm
The concept of evolution is a general, abstract principle, which can be tested and observed in a myriad of ways. Biological evolution is like a specific application of Newtonian mechanics, which is observable on the scale its describing. Memetics, for instance, are another specific application of the broader concept of evolution, and one completely distinct from the principles of biological evolution, we could say they're like quantum physics to biological evolution's Newtonian mechanics. How about genetic algorithms? Another application of the broader idea, and again something completely divorced from both memetics and biological evolution; astrophysics, perhaps? The overall concept of evolution is more like the mathematics that all the different fields of physics run on than any specific application.Allow me to explain the contradictions, then.A matter of semantics. The abstract concept of evolution is demonstrably true. We can sit down and test the mechanisms and principles of it. It is evolution as the origin of modern life that is almost irrefutably proven, enough so that it is deeply irrational to go against it.
1. This has been discussed many times. Ever hear of such things as the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Evolution is not proven 100%. For all we know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster could have done something and made it appear as though evolution is true. You have to understand that even gravity is still a theory, no matter what you may think. Evolution does have evidence in favor of it, but nothing completely and utterly irrefutable.
Newtonian mechanics are demonstrably true too...at a certain scale. At other scales (the subatomic and the cosmological), they break down. Does this mean that Newtonian mechanics are false? Not exactly. It's more accurate to say that Newtonian mechanics are a very close approximation of "reality" except at the extreme ends of the mathematical domain it resides in.
Likewise, Darwinian evolution--as we currently know and describe it--may be an accurate approximation, but could conceivably not hold true at the extremes.
I just copied the whole text, pre-choice.Why did you concede a hit? If you think there's irrefutable proof for evolution, you should just bite the bullet instead. That means that the authors think your view is odd, but consistent.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
If there's a lack of evidence for a concept, belief in it is a matter of faith. Lack of evidence in favor of something's existence is pretty compelling evidence against its existence. Therefore, disbelief in something for which no evidence exists isn't a matter of faith, because the lack of evidence in favor of it is compelling evidence against it. It's a semantic issue, really.It's actually completely irrelevant whether there are compelling arguments for atheism or not. The question is asking what the case would be if there was no compelling evidence. You said that a-Lochnessmonsterism is a logical view to take if there's an absence of evidence, but that atheism would not be a logical view to take if there was an absence of evidence. That is a contradiction.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zangi on March 02, 2011, 01:25:38 pm
"If there is no evidence of 'God', he must exist."
So along that line of thinking... if there is no evidence of Cthulhu, it must exist!
Well, there is also bigfoot and the lochness monster...
Believe
Post by: Darvi on March 02, 2011, 01:27:00 pm
Post by: Zangi on March 02, 2011, 01:34:59 pm
Of course Chtulhu (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=12085) exists.
Can't believe it, I forgot to mention the Blood God Armok (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?action=profile;u=2136).
Post by: ECrownofFire on March 02, 2011, 07:07:56 pm
Stuff
More stuffYour logic is faulty, regardless of what you argue about. It is not about Nessy vs gods, or even evolution vs gods. It is about you attempting to apply different kinds of logic to different situations, when in fact, they are the same. You can replace Nessy with anything you like, gods, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Russel's Teapot, aliens, anything similar. They all have zero proof either for or against, and it is therefore ridiculous to assume that it applies differently to each of them.
And again for the third one, you just really can't see it, can you? If a deity truly was irrational, then all logical discussion about it is completely worthless, and you would be stupid for trying to argue it either way. Because if such a deity existed, no logic could be applied to it, INCLUDING whether or not it exists or not. You are assuming that a deity would be irrational, which means that you couldn't use logic with it. By assuming that a deity is irrational and illogical, then you cannot use any sort of logic at all.
I really think that all of this stems from you simply assuming that gods cannot exist. It is completely ridiculous to assume anything exists or does not exist with no evidence either way. No evidence for it does not equal evidence against it by any means, no matter what you apply it to. You have as much of a bias against gods that theists have for gods.
Post by: Christes on March 02, 2011, 07:31:56 pm
It is completely ridiculous to assume anything exists or does not exist with no evidence either way.
Are you happy concluding that it makes as much sense for Russell's teapot (or any of the above examples) to exist as it does for it not to exist?
From a purely abstract, logical point of view, a statement and its negation are on equal footing. This is great in, say, math or philosphy. But in real life, however, this is not how we operate. I'm perfectly happy in concluding that things don't exist because there is a massive lack of evidence for their existence. Obviously, we can't say anything with complete certainty - and maybe that's your point - but real life is really hairy.
And with the irrational deity thing - I don't see it as an issue if you are against the existence of such a deity. A logical implication is true whenever the hypothesis is false.
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on March 02, 2011, 08:58:34 pm
It's mostly a semantic issue here. Let me try to untangle what I'm trying to say there...StuffMore stuffYour logic is faulty, regardless of what you argue about. It is not about Nessy vs gods, or even evolution vs gods. It is about you attempting to apply different kinds of logic to different situations, when in fact, they are the same. You can replace Nessy with anything you like, gods, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Russel's Teapot, aliens, anything similar. They all have zero proof either for or against, and it is therefore ridiculous to assume that it applies differently to each of them.
If there is no evidence for something, believing (in) it is a matter of faith, but the lack of evidence in favor of it is pretty compelling evidence against it. Therefore, believing that it doesn't exist isn't just a matter of faith, because the lack of evidence in favor of it existing forms a compelling argument against its existence. I believe the statement "In the absence of compelling evidence in its favor, atheism is a matter of faith rather than reason," is true, but also that there is compelling evidence in its favor, in the form of complete absence of evidence of the existence of the things it purports do not exist, therefore it is a matter of reason, rather than one of faith.
Quote
And again for the third one, you just really can't see it, can you? If a deity truly was irrational, then all logical discussion about it is completely worthless, and you would be stupid for trying to argue it either way. Because if such a deity existed, no logic could be applied to it, INCLUDING whether or not it exists or not. You are assuming that a deity would be irrational, which means that you couldn't use logic with it. By assuming that a deity is irrational and illogical, then you cannot use any sort of logic at all.If something is all powerful, it wouldn't be constrained by any set of laws, at least none you are familiar with, otherwise it is not all powerful. Therefore, it could do things which contradict the laws you are familiar with. It is indeed pointless to postulate the existence of such a being, and thus we should disregard the possibility of its existence.
Quote
I really think that all of this stems from you simply assuming that gods cannot exist. It is completely ridiculous to assume anything exists or does not exist with no evidence either way. No evidence for it does not equal evidence against it by any means, no matter what you apply it to. You have as much of a bias against gods that theists have for gods.Atheism is the state of disbelieving outrageous and groundless claims. Further, we know that people can and do make shit like that up, and we can observe dramatic shifts in the memetics of religions of the years. All this paints a pretty compelling picture against their claims, while they have exactly nothing except personal feelings and "but I was told this was true!" to back up their side.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 02, 2011, 09:01:28 pm
Spoiler: I feel like I need to change the poll. (click to show/hide)
Alright, the poll now reflects the outcomes of Strange New World. (http://www.philosophersnet.com/games/matrix_start.htm)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on March 02, 2011, 09:26:01 pm
My opinion is that if we experience something, it does not matter whether it "happened" or not, it is still signifigant.
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on March 02, 2011, 09:37:25 pm
Post by: Diablous on March 02, 2011, 09:41:40 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on March 02, 2011, 09:53:15 pm
Took it last night. Anti-skeptic. It is irrelevant whether or not we are in the Matrix, because unless we were to leave it, we cannot determine such a thing.
Word. Solipsism always struck me as one of those high-school "Maybe my blue is different from your blue whoo I'm so deep" philosophies.
Post by: Retro on March 02, 2011, 09:54:50 pm
Okay, that was rambly and poorly-structured. Just... anti-skeptic, then.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 02, 2011, 10:06:27 pm
Post by: FuzzyZergling on March 02, 2011, 10:24:06 pm
Everyone get together, we're going to form a hive-mind!
Post by: Heliman on March 02, 2011, 10:28:13 pm
If there is no evidence for something, believing (in) it is a matter of faith, but the lack of evidence in favor of it is pretty compelling evidence against it. Therefore, believing that it doesn't exist isn't just a matter of faith, because the lack of evidence in favor of it existing forms a compelling argument against its existence. I believe the statement "In the absence of compelling evidence in its favor, atheism is a matter of faith rather than reason," is true, but also that there is compelling evidence in its favor, in the form of complete absence of evidence of the existence of the things it purports do not exist, therefore it is a matter of reason, rather than one of faith.
That's the thing though, we are not talking about compelling evidence, we are talking about irrevocable evidence. This is a high demand, of course, because the events the transpired before recorded history exist Solely as a giant Schrödinger's cat in a Big, temporal box. In layman's terms, it is essentially impossible to provide irrevocable evidence about evolution, because noone was around to see it. I know, an easy response to this argument is to say, "Idiot, we have fossils!" but if you'd care to search that up on google, you'd find yourself plethora conspiracy theories riding against them. This means that the evidence of fossils, among other pieces of historical data, while likely true, are not irrevokable.
If something is all powerful, it wouldn't be constrained by any set of laws, at least none you are familiar with, otherwise it is not all powerful. Therefore, it could do things which contradict the laws you are familiar with. It is indeed pointless to postulate the existence of such a being, and thus we should disregard the possibility of its existence.Again, you're missing the point, It's not a matter of "should" or "shouldn't," it's a matter of "can" or "can't." You cannot prove, disprove or argue about the existence of a god that can do any action, regardless of established laws of the universe, using logic. Therefore, you bite the bullet.
Quote
I would like for both of you to stop this train of thought before we have a thought-wreck on our hands. We are not arguing "Probability" in this instance, we are arguing "Possibility." As long as there is no irrefutable proof that god cannot exist, there is the possibility that god may exist, therefore you both have the possibility of being correct. LETS LEAVE THE YOUR MENTAL ICONOCLASMS AT THAT, GENTLEMEN. YES I'M LOOKING AT YOU TOO CROWN. BOTH OF YOU. TOGETHER.QuoteI really think that all of this stems from you simply assuming that gods cannot exist. It is completely ridiculous to assume anything exists or does not exist with no evidence either way. No evidence for it does not equal evidence against it by any means, no matter what you apply it to. You have as much of a bias against gods that theists have for gods.Atheism is the state of disbelieving outrageous and groundless claims. Further, we know that people can and do make shit like that up, and we can observe dramatic shifts in the memetics of religions of the years. All this paints a pretty compelling picture against their claims, while they have exactly nothing except personal feelings and "but I was told this was true!" to back up their side.
Shit, lets Shit Shit. I need to got to the bathroom...
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on March 02, 2011, 10:29:14 pm
Bay12 is full of people who think vaguely alike!What will the Bay12mind do, exactly?
Everyone get together, we're going to form a hive-mind!
Post by: Tarran on March 02, 2011, 10:30:06 pm
Shit, lets Shit Shit. I need to got to the bathroom...Saying shit isn't going to help you. :P
Bay12 is full of people who think vaguely alike!Aren't we already a hive mind?
Everyone get together, we're going to form a hive-mind!
Post by: Taricus on March 02, 2011, 10:30:22 pm
Dwarf fortressBay12 is full of people who think vaguely alike!What will the Bay12mind do, exactly?
Everyone get together, we're going to form a hive-mind!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 02, 2011, 10:31:48 pm
I think so. I mean, I can't think of any other explanation for how I obtained this shiny point of Tarran's Good to be sacrificed to Lord Ochita.Bay12 is full of people who think vaguely alike!Aren't we already a hive mind?
Everyone get together, we're going to form a hive-mind!
Post by: Tarran on March 02, 2011, 10:34:39 pm
It wasn't a point of good, it was a point of neutral. Nice try, but ya didn't steal it.I think so. I mean, I can't think of any other explanation for how I obtained this shiny point of Tarran's Good to be sacrificed to Lord Ochita.Bay12 is full of people who think vaguely alike!Aren't we already a hive mind?
Everyone get together, we're going to form a hive-mind!
Post by: Grakelin on March 02, 2011, 10:43:05 pm
Whoops.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 02, 2011, 10:44:27 pm
Post by: Sir Pseudonymous on March 02, 2011, 10:45:27 pm
EDIT: also, let me clarify: I am Omnist: I consider all religions, including Atheism, to be potentially correct. That said, I am totally indifferent to all squabbles between them, and act as a totally neutral party.This was actually a criticism of a question that did use the term "compelling," in its incoherent explanation of why it's totally right and shit. I am attacking the logic the person who put the thing together, not trying to argue some wider point.If there is no evidence for something, believing (in) it is a matter of faith, but the lack of evidence in favor of it is pretty compelling evidence against it. Therefore, believing that it doesn't exist isn't just a matter of faith, because the lack of evidence in favor of it existing forms a compelling argument against its existence. I believe the statement "In the absence of compelling evidence in its favor, atheism is a matter of faith rather than reason," is true, but also that there is compelling evidence in its favor, in the form of complete absence of evidence of the existence of the things it purports do not exist, therefore it is a matter of reason, rather than one of faith.
That's the thing though, we are not talking about compelling evidence, we are talking about irrevocable evidence. This is a high demand, of course, because the events the transpired before recorded history exist Solely as a giant Schrödinger's cat in a Big, temporal box. In layman's terms, it is essentially impossible to provide irrevocable evidence about evolution, because noone was around to see it. I know, an easy response to this argument is to say, "Idiot, we have fossils!" but if you'd care to search that up on google, you'd find yourself plethora conspiracy theories riding against them. This means that the evidence of fossils, among other pieces of historical data, while likely true, are not irrevokable.
Quote
It is indeed pointless to speculate on anything related to such a being, so I don't. I simply ignore it to begin with.If something is all powerful, it wouldn't be constrained by any set of laws, at least none you are familiar with, otherwise it is not all powerful. Therefore, it could do things which contradict the laws you are familiar with. It is indeed pointless to postulate the existence of such a being, and thus we should disregard the possibility of its existence.Again, you're missing the point, It's not a matter of "should" or "shouldn't," it's a matter of "can" or "can't." You cannot prove, disprove or argue about the existence of a god that can do any action, regardless of established laws of the universe, using logic. Therefore, you bite the bullet.
Quote
What are you on about here?*QuoteI would like for both of you to stop this train of thought before we have a thought-wreck on our hands. We are not arguing "Probability" in this instance, we are arguing "Possibility." As long as there is no irrefutable proof that god cannot exist, there is the possibility that god may exist, therefore you both have the possibility of being correct. LETS LEAVE THE YOUR MENTAL ICONOCLASMS AT THAT, GENTLEMEN. YES I'M LOOKING AT YOU TOO CROWN. BOTH OF YOU. TOGETHER.QuoteI really think that all of this stems from you simply assuming that gods cannot exist. It is completely ridiculous to assume anything exists or does not exist with no evidence either way. No evidence for it does not equal evidence against it by any means, no matter what you apply it to. You have as much of a bias against gods that theists have for gods.Atheism is the state of disbelieving outrageous and groundless claims. Further, we know that people can and do make shit like that up, and we can observe dramatic shifts in the memetics of religions of the years. All this paints a pretty compelling picture against their claims, while they have exactly nothing except personal feelings and "but I was told this was true!" to back up their side.
*Don't feel obligated to answer that. Or encouraged. In fact, feel discouraged from answering it.
Post by: Grakelin on March 02, 2011, 10:59:26 pm
* moderately expressed extravert
* moderately expressed intuitive personality
* slightly expressed thinking personality
* slightly expressed judging personality
Post by: Heliman on March 02, 2011, 11:13:15 pm
I'm sorry, you do have me there. I made a grievous misquotation.This was actually a criticism of a question that did use the term "compelling," in its incoherent explanation of why it's totally right and shit. I am attacking the logic the person who put the thing together, not trying to argue some wider point.If there is no evidence for something, believing (in) it is a matter of faith, but the lack of evidence in favor of it is pretty compelling evidence against it. Therefore, believing that it doesn't exist isn't just a matter of faith, because the lack of evidence in favor of it existing forms a compelling argument against its existence. I believe the statement "In the absence of compelling evidence in its favor, atheism is a matter of faith rather than reason," is true, but also that there is compelling evidence in its favor, in the form of complete absence of evidence of the existence of the things it purports do not exist, therefore it is a matter of reason, rather than one of faith.
That's the thing though, we are not talking about compelling evidence, we are talking about irrevocable evidence. This is a high demand, of course, because the events the transpired before recorded history exist Solely as a giant Schrödinger's cat in a Big, temporal box. In layman's terms, it is essentially impossible to provide irrevocable evidence about evolution, because noone was around to see it. I know, an easy response to this argument is to say, "Idiot, we have fossils!" but if you'd care to search that up on google, you'd find yourself plethora conspiracy theories riding against them. This means that the evidence of fossils, among other pieces of historical data, while likely true, are not irrevokable.
Post by: Max White on March 02, 2011, 11:40:26 pm
Spoiler: For those who didn't catch on (click to show/hide)
Post by: Earthquake Damage on March 03, 2011, 12:05:52 am
Also, cute card trick. Having seen it before, I expected it. In fact, I confirmed it by writing down all six cards like a jackass. :P
Also also, stupid slow text. Makes the test take forever.
Anti-skeptic.
Post by: ECrownofFire on March 03, 2011, 12:30:11 am
Post by: Max White on March 03, 2011, 12:33:27 am
I hadn't seen that trick before, but while choosing my card, I realy wanted to choose the queen of clubs, it seemed like a good choice. However, worryed that it had somehow been suggested to be somehow earyler, maybe by that access code trick, I went for the jack of clubs instead. When you spend time thinking about one, then change your mind, you notice when neither are there, and so the trick is revealed.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on March 03, 2011, 01:41:27 am
Post by: Diablous on March 03, 2011, 03:18:37 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 03, 2011, 03:20:21 pm
Post by: Max White on March 03, 2011, 03:38:41 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on March 03, 2011, 03:46:45 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 03, 2011, 03:47:47 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 03, 2011, 03:48:08 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 03, 2011, 03:48:54 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 03, 2011, 03:52:50 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on March 03, 2011, 04:10:58 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on March 03, 2011, 04:12:11 pm
Wasn't the whole thing about being in a perfectly realistic simulation or something? Even if you can prove it's not real, pinching definitely won't be the solution.
Which is why it doesn't matter. It has no effect on my life and can't be determined, so it's irrelevant.
Post by: Darvi on March 03, 2011, 04:16:01 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 03, 2011, 04:35:16 pm
It's annoying that there is no middle ground between sketpic and hero. There isn't a 'We may or may not be living in the matrix, and we may or may not one day show that we are in the matrix.'That doesn't say anything about anything, however. You'd be answering "Maybe, maybe not" on both "Is it possible to tell if we're living in the Matrix." and "Does living in the Matrix mean the reality within it is a lie?".
Post by: Virex on March 03, 2011, 07:50:47 pm
Post by: Fayrik on March 03, 2011, 07:57:33 pm
I found it interesting that the test insisted that plugging someone out of the matrix would be irrefutable evidence of the existence of the matrix, while there are a multitude of possible ways to achieve the same effect without the matrix existing (including, amusingly, plugging someone into the matrix). It also seemed to ignore the opposite possibility; that the one I am communicating is inside the matrix and I am outside while his or her experiences were being fooled. When you start shaking someone's foundation, you'd better be on solid ground yourself or you're going to find your own reasons has cut the ground from under your feet.Or, if that's TL;DR, you could say:
You can't shake the ground you're standing on.
Oh, how I enjoy making up quotes and analogies. :P
Post by: Grimlocke on March 03, 2011, 09:34:12 pm
And again my result is the most common one. I feel generic.
Though a generic bay12-er might still not be so generic...
Post by: alway on March 03, 2011, 10:06:20 pm
If it is a simulation for some sort of analog outside the universe, you run into the problem that your mind may itself still be at least in part simulated. Even that would have some pretty nasty side effects on who you are as a person when you are instantly given the equivalent of a partial lobotomy upon re-entering your analogous form in the next level up.
Even if we are to assume neither of the above 2 scenarios, that still leaves you with one obvious fact: someone/something put you in there for a reason and then wiped all memory of not being in there. You then have a question of whether it was benevolent or malicious. For all you know, you are in there because of a catastrophic event rendering the next universe up entirely devoid of the environment required to sustain life. Even the Matrix itself I would classify as semi-benevolent. After all, if the AI couldn't stick all the pesky humans in there, they would probably be extinct years before the movie even took place. Pretty much all but the classic sci-fi "keep you in until your body starves to death outside" would qualify as a benevolent reason for putting you in there. Being inside in most scenarios is actually better than whatever horrible fate awaits outside.
As I previously stated, we still couldn't be sure a universe above this one would be the top level. The simulated universes could go as deep as to make Inception look as shallow as a drop of water. Similar to virtual machines running other virtual machines. Although in this case the virtual machines may have entirely different laws of physics governing them.
Post by: ECrownofFire on March 03, 2011, 10:49:29 pm
Post by: alway on March 03, 2011, 11:36:41 pm
Near infinite number of nested simulated universes? Say, that reminds me of a story (http://qntm.org/responsibility).Very good story representation, yes. However, with known laws of our universe, not in that sort of way since infinite computing power can't be done. Going up a few levels, perhaps there could be, but not in ours. Thus that sort of infinite recursion could not occur. Ever more simplistic simulations could occur below ours, but nothing reaching or surpassing the total computing power of our universe. A rather simple example of this is the 8 bit computer someone built a while back in Dwarf Fortress. You could build a dwarf fortress computer which, theoretically, if you had enough knowledge of the software, would then be capable of running Dwarf Fortress on it, albeit much more slowly. In a universe with a finite amount of energy available for computation, this results in less total available computations at each level. As you go deeper, the available computation ability decreases as it approaches and reaches 0.
Go up above our level, and you could theoretically reach some sort of odd universe in which causality wasn't as strict, "time" flowed in loops under certain circumstances, or even stranger laws were in place which may lead to the ability for infinite computational power. In that case, such recursion would be possible, if not entirely probable.
That of course assumes the fully simulated version of universes, rather than the storage universe built to fool a single person or group of people into thinking it either is a universe simulated from the beginning or top level universe.
Post by: Nivim on March 03, 2011, 11:39:46 pm
Near infinite number of nested simulated universes? Say, that reminds me of a story (http://qntm.org/responsibility).Aha, a demonstration that infinity breaks things far more than people joke dividing by zero does. Although, it appears the comments on that page have covered just about all the story has to offer.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 05:08:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Disorganized and Gain-Oriented (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:09:39 pm
Quote
My room is described as "Chaos Central"/fixed. Literally.
Your Result: Disorganized Visionary
You'd be an impulsive killer. You'll murder when the oppourtunity arises, then leave the body where you killed it. You'll evade capture not through intelligence, but through constant movement. The reason for your killing is simple: you're delusional. You'll go absolutely bonkers and in your insane fantasies, you'll come up with a reason why someone must die. This is good, though. Visionary serial killers wind up in mental institutions.
Organized and hedonistic come out lowest. Naturally.
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:13:41 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on March 12, 2011, 05:14:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 05:14:20 pm
Spoiler: Disorganized and Hedonist (click to show/hide)
...Wow.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on March 12, 2011, 05:14:49 pm
Spoiler: Disorganized and Gain-Oriented (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 05:15:42 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on March 12, 2011, 05:16:24 pm
You'd be an impulsive killer. You'll murder when the oppourtunity arises, then leave the body where you killed it. You'll evade capture not through intelligence, but through constant movement. You'll kill for the sheer pleasure of killing. The aspect that you'd enjoy varies- the chase, perhaps, or torturing and abusing the victim before their death. Maybe you'd be a necrophiliac or a cannibal. Murders excite you, either emotionally or sexually. You're disgusting, man.
Seems to be mainly because I got quite low on everything.
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 05:19:17 pm
Good lord Diablous. That's horrid.
I swear to god, for the sexual fantasy about corpses question, I said no. And that I would only eat human flesh if I was starving.
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:20:27 pm
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:21:30 pm
You're a planner. You'd carefully plot each murder, and carry it out methodically. You'll kill them in one location and move them to another later, and you'll study up your forensic science. The good news is, you're much harder to catch. You'll have a specific reason to kill. You'll target a specific group, like prostitutes or members of a minority, and you'll believe their deaths are justified on the grounds that you're "cleansing" the earth of that particular kind of people. You'll think you're helping society.
Well.... I guess If I'm like Dexter... Who is Chaotic good/Lawful evil.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 05:23:06 pm
Yeah, sure you did. I mean, I'd apparently kill people for profit, but that's just sick.Good lord Diablous. That's horrid.
I swear to god, for the sexual fantasy about corpses question, I said no. And that I would only eat human flesh if I was starving.
/me shakes his head at you dissaprovingly as he cleans the blood off of his hands.
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:24:30 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on March 12, 2011, 05:26:02 pm
You'd be an impulsive killer. You'll murder when the oppourtunity arises, then leave the body where you killed it. You'll evade capture not through intelligence, but through constant movement. You won't kill for the person, you'll kill for material gain. Your goal is finance, not a psychopathic compulsion- but you have absolutely no problem killing as many people as necessary to get what you want.
BAH HUMBUG
Post by: MaximumZero on March 12, 2011, 05:26:15 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:27:20 pm
...that, and the fact that it's wrong. Yeah...
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 05:28:27 pm
*Ochita carefully aims the blowdart at Diablous.*
Crap. Uh, uh, look, a distraction! *points behind Ochita, then grabs a knife from his pocket*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:31:08 pm
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:31:25 pm
Darvi! Kill Diablous!
*Ochita pulls out a Rapier, and strikes!*
Post by: MaximumZero on March 12, 2011, 05:32:16 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:32:32 pm
Wait until they're asleep, 'kay?
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 05:33:14 pm
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:34:25 pm
*throws his knife at Ochita, and runs like hell**Throws his rapier, and it parries, in mid-air. Ochita then pulls out a scoped Springfield... And fires.*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:35:03 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on March 12, 2011, 05:35:56 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 05:36:08 pm
...Anyway, apparently I'm Disorganized and Gain-Oriented.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on March 12, 2011, 05:36:29 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:36:57 pm
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:37:23 pm
I don't need to kill you, just... Mentally scar.
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:38:04 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:38:34 pm
*Steals Realmfighters stuff while he's dancing**stabs Taricus and keeps corpsecamping*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:39:04 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on March 12, 2011, 05:39:12 pm
Post by: Osmosis Jones on March 12, 2011, 05:39:58 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:40:10 pm
I'm just waiting for somebody to kill Ochita so I can quote the princess bride :3
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 05:40:29 pm
*Ochita then pulls out a scoped Springfield... And fires.*(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3222/3049264018_47287cdfb5_o.gif)
Tarran! Help!
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:41:42 pm
Post by: Realmfighter on March 12, 2011, 05:41:48 pm
*Realmfighter finds himself in a Tango, with Ochita.*
I don't need to kill you, just... Mentally scar.
*Whimper*
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:42:32 pm
Oh hush now.... Lets pick it up a notch.*Realmfighter finds himself in a Tango, with Ochita.*
I don't need to kill you, just... Mentally scar.
*Whimper*
*Ochita and realmfighter become a flurry.*
Post by: Realmfighter on March 12, 2011, 05:43:33 pm
Oh hush now.... Lets pick it up a notch.
*Ochita and realmfighter become a furry.*
Oh thank god I read that wrong.
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:43:40 pm
*ASSUMES DIRECT CONTROL over darvi*Sorry man, you're in the minority here.
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:44:32 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:45:16 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:46:53 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:47:50 pm
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:47:59 pm
*Ochita and Realm start a faster tango. Ochita is obviously the male partner.*Oh hush now.... Lets pick it up a notch.
*Ochita and realmfighter become a furry.*
Oh thank god I read that wrong.
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 05:49:15 pm
*throws his knife at Ochita, and runs like hell**Throws his rapier, and it parries, in mid-air. Ochita then pulls out a scoped Springfield... And fires.*
*the bullet hits, and Diablous falls to the ground, bleeding. He tries to crawl away, unnoticed in the chaos*
Post by: Realmfighter on March 12, 2011, 05:49:56 pm
*Ochita and Realm start a faster tango. Ochita is obviously the male partner.*
*Realmfighter Remains Uncomfortably Okay with These Events*
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 05:50:30 pm
Ochita is obviously the male partner.*Well, so is Realmfighter.
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:50:38 pm
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 05:51:57 pm
Pah.
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 05:52:31 pm
*Starts dragging Diablous around*
*weakly*"Please tell me you're dragging me someplace where a bunch of psychos aren't killing each other. Like a hospital."
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 05:53:26 pm
*MetalSlimeHunt imputs a code into the suitcase nuke, drops it, slips out the back door, and puts on sunglasses.*
A brawl of atomic proportions.
*YEAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH-But seriously, I'm already driving away*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 05:54:06 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 05:57:24 pm
If you say so.*Ochita then pulls out a scoped Springfield... And fires.*Tarran! Help!
*Shoots a volcano out from underneath Ochita*
Post by: Ochita on March 12, 2011, 06:00:06 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 06:01:13 pm
*Jumps into MSH's car with diablous* "HOSPITAL NOW!"*MSH continues to accelerate* (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qa4HJGojADM&feature=player_detailpage#t=5s)
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:01:53 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 06:02:29 pm
*Too bad its dormant! Oh!*Oh why you little...
*Screws up the orbit of the moon, causing it to crash into Ochita*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:03:10 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 06:04:18 pm
"OH FFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-":D
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 06:04:52 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:05:55 pm
Oi, only Joshua can do that!*Too bad its dormant! Oh!*Oh why you little...
*Screws up the orbit of the moon, causing it to crash into Ochita*
Hello, you killed my father. You know the rest! *stab*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:06:47 pm
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on March 12, 2011, 06:10:12 pm
"Where's the loot?"
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:10:30 pm
*rises from the dead*"Right here."
"Where's the loot?"
Post by: Max White on March 12, 2011, 06:10:59 pm
Spoiler: What Kind of Serial Killer Would I Be? Interesting Question! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 06:11:35 pm
Post by: Max White on March 12, 2011, 06:12:28 pm
Not my moon!
*Sobs into arm*
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on March 12, 2011, 06:12:55 pm
*steals the loot and escapes in the chaos*
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:13:29 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 06:13:35 pm
*Moon smashes into the earth, sending everyone into orbit of Earth(me)**Earth's orbit begins to decay towards Sol*
Well, we're screwed. And I invested in this emegency space suit and everything.
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:14:19 pm
"Wonderful.""What loot? There's no loot!"
*steals the loot and escapes in the chaos*
Post by: Max White on March 12, 2011, 06:14:40 pm
Post by: Burnt Pies on March 12, 2011, 06:15:58 pm
*I walk in, holding a glass of custard and a Cricket Bat.*
"I find this entire display distasteful."
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:16:39 pm
*Steals BP's Custard*
Post by: Leafsnail on March 12, 2011, 06:16:51 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:17:08 pm
*Steals BP's Custard*You bastard! You'll die for that!
Post by: Max White on March 12, 2011, 06:17:12 pm
I'm heading to my mars base!
*Steals BP's Custard*
How did you walk while in orbit on a planet falling into a star?
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 06:17:17 pm
"Er, the nuke isn't here..."
"Oh, that must have been due to the blood loss."
*Moon smashes into the earth, sending everyone into orbit of Earth(me)**Earth's orbit begins to decay towards Sol*
Well, we're screwed. And I invested in this emegency space suit and everything.
"...Crap. Please tell me this is one of those things where it takes years for the effects to be felt.
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 06:17:36 pm
We're not dead yet. Though I wouldn't be surprised if you guys have cancer now.
Wiping out huge groups of people at once? Bah. Get out of here, you pathetic mass murderer. Serial killing is obviously where it's at.Who?
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:18:16 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on March 12, 2011, 06:18:24 pm
Post by: Max White on March 12, 2011, 06:19:09 pm
*Slows down and flies at a super fast speed past the sun and into orbit of Jupiter*
We're not dead yet. Though I wouldn't be surprised if you guys have cancer now.
Don't worry, I already have several STI's, and that means there is a very good chance Darvi does too.
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:19:45 pm
Spoiler: Not really. (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 12, 2011, 06:20:13 pm
Disorganized visionary. God was on my TV and he told me to kill everyone who *roleplays* outside of FG&RPBut it's my thre-*BLAM*
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:20:40 pm
Disorganized visionary. God was on my TV and he told me to kill everyone who *roleplays* outside of FG&RPWait, Vector was on TV? What channel?
Post by: Max White on March 12, 2011, 06:21:11 pm
Spoiler: Not really. (click to show/hide)
Aww shit. Wait...
UP UP DOWN DOWN LEFT RIGHT LEFT RIGHT B A SELECT START!
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:26:12 pm
Spoiler: Great, you broke Real Life (click to show/hide)
Post by: Burnt Pies on March 12, 2011, 06:37:07 pm
*I take my cricket bat to Darvi's Cheat Engine.*
No Cheating, Inferior!
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:37:38 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:38:11 pm
Ingests the custardYou fiend!
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:39:04 pm
Post by: Megaman on March 12, 2011, 06:39:29 pm
Well then.
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:39:41 pm
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:41:17 pm
Post by: Megaman on March 12, 2011, 06:43:17 pm
Take that cat fight outside
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:46:04 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:46:10 pm
*Darvi has Aleph-Pi HP left*
Agreed. But you're still giving back that custard >_>
Post by: Burnt Pies on March 12, 2011, 06:47:41 pm
It's my custard, god damnit! I drink it, and I take revenge for its' loss! I need no help from you snivelling scumbags!
*I smack Taricus in the stomach with the bat, making him throw up.*
Ugh, now it's all dirty. Bastard.
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 06:48:50 pm
PINBALL TIME!
*Tarran pin-balls Darvi around Jupiter with help of it's moons*
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:49:39 pm
*with the cricket bat.*Now that's tasteless.
Wait, Darvi has infinite HP?*Ninja-dodge* :P
PINBALL TIME!
*Tarran pin-balls Darvi around Jupiter with help of it's moons*
Post by: eerr on March 12, 2011, 06:50:09 pm
You'd be an impulsive killer. You'll murder when the oppourtunity arises, then leave the body where you killed it. You'll evade capture not through intelligence, but through constant movement. You'll kill for the sheer pleasure of killing. The aspect that you'd enjoy varies- the chase, perhaps, or torturing and abusing the victim before their death. Maybe you'd be a necrophiliac or a cannibal. Murders excite you, either emotionally or sexually. You're disgusting, man.
Shebam
I am a board cereal killer.
Maybe I'll use cheerios to kill a man.
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:50:43 pm
Post by: Burnt Pies on March 12, 2011, 06:52:20 pm
*hits Taricus again*
Bastard.
Post by: Taricus on March 12, 2011, 06:53:48 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:54:17 pm
Freezes BP and eats the custard againEww.
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 06:54:58 pm
*Ninja-anti-dodge! Smack!*Wait, Darvi has infinite HP?*Ninja-dodge* :P
PINBALL TIME!
*Tarran pin-balls Darvi around Jupiter with help of it's moons*
Maybe I'll use cheerios to kill a man.*Cough* cheerios?
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 06:56:33 pm
...you do realize I have a planet buster lying around, right? ... somewhere in this mess here...*Ninja-anti-dodge! Smack!*Wait, Darvi has infinite HP?*Ninja-dodge* :P
PINBALL TIME!
*Tarran pin-balls Darvi around Jupiter with help of it's moons*
Quote
I've seen weirder murder weapons.Maybe I'll use cheerios to kill a man.*Cough* cheerios?
Post by: Itnetlolor on March 12, 2011, 08:07:22 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: inteuniso on March 12, 2011, 08:42:36 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Angel Of Death on March 12, 2011, 08:49:54 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 09:03:49 pm
Post by: Angel Of Death on March 12, 2011, 09:10:38 pm
A tad late for that.I can't find the link to the Serial Killer thingy. ???
Post by: Tarran on March 12, 2011, 09:12:13 pm
A tad late for that.I can't find the link to the Serial Killer thingy. ???
Alright, time to make this thread live in the most macabre manner possible. What kind of Serial Killer are you? (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_kind_of_serial_killer_would_you_be) (Disclaimer: Do not become a serial killer to confirm the results of this quiz. This is for fun, nothing more.)Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Disorganized and Gain-Oriented (click to show/hide)
Post by: Diablous on March 12, 2011, 09:12:34 pm
Post by: Angel Of Death on March 12, 2011, 09:17:51 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on March 12, 2011, 09:43:12 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 12, 2011, 09:44:20 pm
Disorganized visionary. Hurm.Yaay. The world needs more of us really.
Post by: Christes on March 12, 2011, 10:00:08 pm
Spoiler: Organized and Mission-Oriented (click to show/hide)
Post by: Myroc on March 13, 2011, 05:40:22 am
Spoiler: Disorganized and Mission-Oriented (click to show/hide)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on March 13, 2011, 01:02:19 pm
Spoiler: Disorganized and Gain-Oriented (click to show/hide)
Post by: NewsMuffin on April 27, 2011, 04:39:07 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
My runner up is Organized Visionary.
Post by: Criptfeind on April 27, 2011, 04:50:51 pm
Pretty creepy that it says "you'll kill for material gain"
I most likely got that because of my philosophy of "Do unto others what they might do unto you. But make sure you go first so they can not do unto you."
Post by: NewsMuffin on April 27, 2011, 04:55:41 pm
Post by: Earthquake Damage on April 27, 2011, 05:01:03 pm
"Do unto others what they might do unto you. But make sure you go first so they can not do unto you."
That's fairly appropriate for this quiz, actually. You're also a horrible person. :P
Spoiler: Result (click to show/hide)
That latter part sounds very Jack the Ripper. So apparently I'd be old school. :-\
Post by: lemon10 on April 27, 2011, 05:01:27 pm
Post by: Ricky on April 27, 2011, 08:29:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
hmm.I guess so.
Post by: Criptfeind on April 27, 2011, 08:53:54 pm
You're also a horrible person. :P
Why? It have served me well in the past.
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on April 27, 2011, 08:56:40 pm
Spoiler: Result (click to show/hide)
And I as well.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 27, 2011, 09:11:31 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Alright, time for the political spectrum quiz. (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html) Please don't burn down the thread while I'm not looking, I say as I hand you all packs of matches and kerosene drums.
Post by: TherosPherae on April 27, 2011, 09:21:33 pm
Not that I wasn't expecting that, though. I've always been sort of a "meh" kind of person when it comes to politics.
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 27, 2011, 09:23:37 pm
On the left side are pacifists and anti-war activists. On the right side are those who want a strong military that intervenes around the world. You scored: -5.86
Culture:
Where are you in the culture war? On the liberal side, or the conservative side? This scale may apply more to the US than other countries. You scored: -8.7
I'm tired so I probably answered some questions wrong. I may be more left than this states.
Post by: Criptfeind on April 27, 2011, 09:29:49 pm
I am a center-left social libertarian
Left: 2.55, Libertarian: 5.61
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/15x31.gif)
Edit: Also some things seem like they give too much empathizes to certain parts. I would say in many cases I am more Authoritarian, except for freedom of expression, for which I am a rabid Libertarian. But since most of the A/L slider stuff had to do with freedom of expression, I got slanted that way.
Post by: SalmonGod on April 27, 2011, 09:44:37 pm
I am a left social libertarian
Left: 6.08, Libertarian: 7.51
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/8x35.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on April 27, 2011, 09:51:37 pm
I am a far-left moderate social libertarian
Left: 8.27, Libertarian: 3.19
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/3x26.gif)
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on April 27, 2011, 09:54:13 pm
I am a left social libertarian
Left: 4.42, Libertarian: 3.63
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/11x27.gif)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -5.1
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n25.gif)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -6.83
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c16.gif)
Post by: Megaman on April 27, 2011, 10:02:17 pm
Post by: Tarran on April 27, 2011, 10:04:02 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 27, 2011, 10:06:02 pm
I did get strongly on the non-interventionist and the cultural liberal sliders though.
Post by: TherosPherae on April 27, 2011, 10:06:56 pm
Hey, I'm right when everyone else on this here thread is left.
I ended up being a center-right moderate social libertarian.I AM NOT ALONE *tears of joy*
Post by: Tarran on April 27, 2011, 10:07:54 pm
Anyone who doesn't post pictures is less important, I guess. :P
Post by: FuzzyZergling on April 27, 2011, 10:09:25 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not all that surprised.
Post by: Bdthemag on April 27, 2011, 10:18:47 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I am suprisingly liberal, I blame it on the Liberal Crime Squad.
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 27, 2011, 10:20:22 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 27, 2011, 10:24:08 pm
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/18x35.gif)
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n13.gif)(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c19.gif)
Post by: Tarran on April 27, 2011, 10:28:36 pm
Must've been other options that have a far bigger impact. Maybe my "survival of the fittest" position.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 27, 2011, 10:32:56 pm
I'm more libertarian than all of you!You're about as libertatian as me, but I didn't bother to save my results. I'm just a sliver more left, though.
Post by: sonerohi on April 27, 2011, 10:35:19 pm
Left: 1.13, Libertarian: 1.02
On the left side are pacifists and anti-war activists. On the right side are those who want a strong military that intervenes around the world. You scored: -0.85
Where are you in the culture war? On the liberal side, or the conservative side? This scale may apply more to the US than other countries. You scored: -4.45
Post by: mainiac on April 27, 2011, 10:41:57 pm
Not to mention the stupid ass question bias. "From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs" is supposed to be a litmus test? Well that gives Karl Freaking Marx points on the rightward side. Marx when uttering that phrase said "It is not until work ceases to be a burden on life and becomes it's chief joy and purpose that we can inscribe on our banner "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." clearly showing that he thought the idea was bullocks!
Of course there were Christian socialists at the time who thought the principle was sound. They wanted to be like the early Christians. The atheist Marx did not. So it really shows that it's not so much a matter of left vs. right or authoritarian vs. libertarian so much as Christian vs. atheist socialist. Which isn't an axis on the graph. Because you can't have an axis for every difference in people's views. Because trying to graph someone's politics on a simple 2 dimensional graph is both inane and insane.
[/rant]. I feel better now. Please stop changing the name of this damn thread and I'll leave it alone.
Might as well mention my actual political leanings: Madisonian Civic Democracy.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 27, 2011, 10:44:50 pm
Please stop changing the name of this damn thread and I'll leave it alone.No. The first part of the name is always the same, so it isn't like you can't tell it's the same thread.
Post by: Earthquake Damage on April 27, 2011, 10:53:18 pm
rant
Spoiler: Herp (click to show/hide)
In other words, this quiz is for entertainment purposes only. It should in no way be used as the basis for political association or policy.
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 27, 2011, 10:54:29 pm
I hate how this thread changes it's name to make me think there is a new debate. And the graph in question is absolute rubbish. It thinks that I support libertarians because I actually value civil liberties (shocker!). Like Hell! Libertarians are to people what Orcs are to Elves. Long ago they came from the same stock but now they are twisted and evil.Ah, there's a difference between a political party and a political leaning. Political parties are always accused of being Democrats/Republicans/Libertarians in name only.
Not to mention the stupid ass question bias. "From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs" is supposed to be a litmus test? Well that gives Karl Freaking Marx points on the rightward side. Marx when uttering that phrase said "It is not until work ceases to be a burden on life and becomes it's chief joy and purpose that we can inscribe on our banner "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." clearly showing that he thought the idea was bullocks!I think the idea was that the phrase is the goal of socialism/communism :P
(I mix the two up, but I think that would be communism...)
Of course there were Christian socialists at the time who thought the principle was sound. They wanted to be like the early Christians. The atheist Marx did not. So it really shows that it's not so much a matter of left vs. right or authoritarian vs. libertarian so much as Christian vs. atheist socialist. Which isn't an axis on the graph. Because you can't have an axis for every difference in people's views. Because trying to graph someone's politics on a simple 2 dimensional graph is both inane and insane.What the fuck, keep religion out of this. And anyway, the graph is a simplification. You can't realistically expect any kind of graph to give anything close to 100% accuracy, so why expect this one to do just that, in an area that's VASTLY more complicated than "what kind of serial killer would you be?".
Post by: Cthulhu on April 27, 2011, 10:55:15 pm
I hate how this thread changes it's name to make me think there is a new debate. And the graph in question is absolute rubbish. It thinks that I support libertarians because I actually value civil liberties (shocker!). Like Hell! Libertarians are to people what Orcs are to Elves. Long ago they came from the same stock but now they are twisted and evil.
Sounds like you're hung up on the words instead of the concepts here.
Anyway, I got about 4 squares left and 5 squares down. I've slowly been drifting left as I leave the teenage "Let's cover a dartboard with randomly selected political views, look up whatever we hit on wikipedia, and adopt the most idealist unrealistic implementation of said political theory as our way of life" thing. I'm glad I got through that.
As soon as I got old enough to make my own political decisions, I went socialist, then anarcho-communist, then jumped all the way across the board to laissez-faire libertarian (I don't remember what brought that about) and then realized that no matter where I was on the chart I was acting like a jackass and hid in the center.
Post by: Osmosis Jones on April 27, 2011, 10:58:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Heh, I'm happy with those results.
Also, chilll ninja peeps, chill. It's just the interwubs, it's not real.
Post by: mainiac on April 27, 2011, 11:04:11 pm
No. The first part of the name is always the same, so it isn't like you can't tell it's the same thread.
I could tell if I was following the thread and thus had reason to remember it. But I don't want to follow the thread. You don't want me to follow the thread either because that leads to me posting angry rants when I click on it and go "oh, not this shit again."
And anyway, the graph is a simplification. You can't realistically expect any kind of graph to give anything close to 100% accuracy, so why expect this one to do just that, in an area that's VASTLY more complicated than "what kind of serial killer would you be?".
There are good simplifications and bad simplifications. I think that this graph and test are bad. They make you less, not more informed about politics by handing you an inherently flawed paradigm.
It's not like I'm angry at any of you, I'm just being meta. I think the more interesting discussion lies in why this test is crap then the results of this crap test.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 27, 2011, 11:09:45 pm
I could tell if I was following the thread and thus had reason to remember it. But I don't want to follow the thread. You don't want me to follow the thread either because that leads to me posting angry rants when I click on it and go "oh, not this shit again."If you don't want to follow the thread, don't follow the thread. I do not particuarly have any opinion on you following this thread or not.
Post by: Heron TSG on April 27, 2011, 11:11:53 pm
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/11x29.gif)
Foreign Policy:
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n25.gif)
Culture:
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c14.gif)
Post by: mainiac on April 27, 2011, 11:15:50 pm
I could tell if I was following the thread and thus had reason to remember it. But I don't want to follow the thread. You don't want me to follow the thread either because that leads to me posting angry rants when I click on it and go "oh, not this shit again."If you don't want to follow the thread, don't follow the thread. I do not particuarly have any opinion on you following this thread or not.
But I can't not follow the thread if you keep changing the name. As soon as I forget there's a thread that keeps changing it's name I'll say "oooh, a thread I've never seen. Let me click on here and see what's happening." Cue disappointment, betrayal, sadness, erectile dysfunction, ennui, depression, teenage pregnancy, puzzlement and a whole host of other negative emotions. Why must you do this to me? Whyyyyyyyyyyyy?
Post by: SalmonGod on April 27, 2011, 11:19:49 pm
But I can't not follow the thread if you keep changing the name. As soon as I forget there's a thread that keeps changing it's name I'll say "oooh, a thread I've never seen. Let me click on here and see what's happening."
This thread's title has always begun with the words "Shit, let's be". No other thread has ever begun with those words, to my knowledge. When you see those words, it is safe to assume that it is this thread.
Post by: mainiac on April 27, 2011, 11:26:04 pm
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on April 27, 2011, 11:27:01 pm
Post by: mainiac on April 27, 2011, 11:27:32 pm
Post by: Tarran on April 27, 2011, 11:28:21 pm
This thread's title has always begun with the words "Shit, let's be".Not always. There was a time it was once "Shit, let's try to stay sane *Blah blah blah*"
Anyway, I personally have no trouble recognizing this thread. It has a poll, it has Shit on it's title, it's started by MSH, and it has a lot of posts.
Ed: 1000th post whhhheeeeeee...
Post by: Earthquake Damage on April 27, 2011, 11:28:54 pm
Post by: Osmosis Jones on April 27, 2011, 11:31:16 pm
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 27, 2011, 11:32:20 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on April 27, 2011, 11:38:55 pm
I can't make that assumption unless I remember to make that assumption, now can I? And I don't want to have to remember. It pains me. And misery loves company, which is why I thought I'd spread it to you guys.
Do you often get mad at threads that do not change their name then? Cause if you can not be arsed to remember "Shit, lets be" I do not see how you remember the full names of other threads.
Post by: TherosPherae on April 27, 2011, 11:40:44 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on April 28, 2011, 12:09:52 am
My Political Views
I am a left social libertarian
Left: 5.95, Libertarian: 4.13
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/8x28.gif)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -9.19
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n4.gif)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -6.55
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c17.gif)
Post by: Christes on April 28, 2011, 12:43:49 am
I am a centrist moderate social libertarian
Left: 0.03, Libertarian: 2.74
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/20x25.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -0.56
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n47.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -1.07
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c45.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
I'm probably centrist since I found myself answering neutral on all of the vague questions...
Post by: Taricus on April 28, 2011, 03:10:32 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Criptfeind on April 28, 2011, 03:13:15 am
Post by: Tarran on April 28, 2011, 03:22:28 am
Post by: Strife26 on April 28, 2011, 05:34:48 am
My Political Views
I am a left moderate social libertarian
Left: 5.55, Libertarian: 1.16
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/9x22.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -0.68
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n47.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -3.54
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c32.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
These are my results today. Honestly, I don't think that a lot of the questions are well done.
Post by: Darvi on April 28, 2011, 05:46:29 am
Spoiler: Welp, that's not surprising (click to show/hide)
Post by: Leafsnail on April 28, 2011, 11:28:42 am
Spoiler: Comments on questions (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Compass (click to show/hide)
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 28, 2011, 12:28:08 pm
I usually just assume that there's "most of the time" or "always" somewhere in the question.Spoiler: Comments on questions (click to show/hide)
Post by: Leafsnail on April 28, 2011, 12:31:44 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 28, 2011, 12:35:33 pm
I don't think that really resolves any of them. The first one is still asking you about a historical fact (which should have nothing to do with your political leanings), the second remains vague, the third still has the erroneous assumption that makes it impossible for a protectionist to honestly answer and the fourth... well, maybe, but I'd say it still varies too much to be very useful.I think in order to disagree with the first one, you'd have to say that IF unions did not exist, then the middle class could have arisen some other way. The second is just a stupid question in the first place. The third is phrased from the position of the anti-protectionist. A protectionist would probably say "so what?" to it being "economically protectionist".
Also, if a question already says "always", then I take it as a "100% NEVER EVER EVER DO THIS EVER" kind of thing.
Post by: Cthulhu on April 28, 2011, 12:42:20 pm
Post by: Ancre on April 28, 2011, 01:04:49 pm
My Political Views
I am a left moderate social libertarian
Left: 5.31, Libertarian: 1.8
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/9x24.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -4.38
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n28.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Culture War Stance
Score: 1.56
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c58.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
I'm a cultural conservative left libertarian ! Strange.
Post by: Leafsnail on April 28, 2011, 01:22:36 pm
I think in order to disagree with the first one, you'd have to say that IF unions did not exist, then the middle class could have arisen some other way.For the first... you could have studied the originof the middle class and have determined that unions were not key in it. I dunno, it means people end up answering 2 questions based on their guessing as to what the questioner meant.
The second is just a stupid question in the first place. The third is phrased from the position of the anti-protectionist. A protectionist would probably say "so what?" to it being "economically protectionist".
Also, if a question already says "always", then I take it as a "100% NEVER EVER EVER DO THIS EVER" kind of thing.
A protectionist to the third one could potentially agree with the first part of the question and disagree with the second part. I don't think there's any way to resolve this... sure, it doesn't matter too much in the course of the survey (when I found questions I couldn't really answer, I generally just went neutral and put it at lowest importance), but it's still a bad question which implies a bias in the questioner.
The second question is fine. It's one of those libertarian/authoritarian questions. "Moral" in that case is clearly something that some consider wrong but doesn't actually hurt anyone. Arguing that gay marriage should be banned would be a moral question, because it doesn't hurt anyone (except the ones getting married, yuk yuk yuk)I guess so. In the same way that "Family values" seems to mean "Anti-gay" for many people, "morals" often seems to mean "not doing things which don't harm people but which are just bad". But I feel it could easily mean a lot of other things too - ethics in experimenting, responsibility in business or whatever.
Post by: Diablous on April 28, 2011, 02:19:30 pm
I am a left social moderate
Left: 4.71, Authoritarian: 0.04
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/11x20.gif)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -3.19
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n34.gif)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -4.07
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c30.gif)
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 03:10:58 pm
Post by: Taricus on April 28, 2011, 03:12:28 pm
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 28, 2011, 03:13:14 pm
It seems this poll is heavily balanced towards left libertarians, that or most people here are DIRTY HIPPEHS! Ahahah, though seriously, this is suspicious.The internet in general is kind of biased due to the majority of users being in the under 25 range. Bay12 is even more biased. We only have the one Arch-Conservative :P
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 03:13:32 pm
Post by: Darvi on April 28, 2011, 03:14:52 pm
Post by: Taricus on April 28, 2011, 03:16:24 pm
Really, I'd be fine with less freedom, but most humans can not be trusted with a large amount of power over others. They'll just fuck it up.Hey, I'll only kill you for dissenting thoughts :P
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 03:17:29 pm
Whaddya expect from a community that endorses a game that's called "Liberal Crime Squad"?LCS is actually insulting liberals :P
A SENSIBLE dictator would only kill for outspoken dissenting thoughtsReally, I'd be fine with less freedom, but most humans can not be trusted with a large amount of power over others. They'll just fuck it up.Hey, I'll only kill you for dissenting thoughts :P
Post by: Taricus on April 28, 2011, 03:18:35 pm
Post by: Nadaka on April 28, 2011, 03:19:58 pm
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 03:21:00 pm
force them into it at gun point.Wait, you're forcing people to have freedom?
Post by: Taricus on April 28, 2011, 03:21:55 pm
But it's the best kind of freedom.force them into it at gun point.Wait, you're forcing people to have freedom?
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 03:23:18 pm
Wait a second, so freedom is an illu-But it's the best kind of freedom.force them into it at gun point.Wait, you're forcing people to have freedom?
BRB, being executed for knowing too much.
Post by: Bdthemag on April 28, 2011, 03:39:34 pm
Not if the Liberal Crime Squad has anything to say about it! Liberals unite!Wait a second, so freedom is an illu-But it's the best kind of freedom.force them into it at gun point.Wait, you're forcing people to have freedom?
BRB, being executed for knowing too much.
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 28, 2011, 03:42:15 pm
CONSERVATIVE! CONSERVATIIIIIVEEE!
AoD fires his .44 magnum at Megaman!
His head is blown apart!
Megaman sucks one last breath through the neck hole and dies.
Post by: Criptfeind on April 28, 2011, 03:47:50 pm
It seems this poll is heavily balanced towards left libertarians, that or most people here are DIRTY HIPPEHS! Ahahah, though seriously, this is suspicious.The internet in general is kind of biased due to the majority of users being in the under 25 range. Bay12 is even more biased. We only have the one Arch-Conservative :P
Oh, we have more then one.
Post by: TherosPherae on April 28, 2011, 03:48:17 pm
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 04:18:04 pm
Liberal Crime Squad insulting Liberals? BLASPHEMY!I'm still here, pal.
CONSERVATIVE! CONSERVATIIIIIVEEE!
AoD fires his .44 magnum at Megaman!
His head is blown apart!
Megaman sucks one last breath through the neck hole and dies.
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 28, 2011, 04:19:15 pm
*gasp*Liberal Crime Squad insulting Liberals? BLASPHEMY!I'm still here, pal.
CONSERVATIVE! CONSERVATIIIIIVEEE!
AoD fires his .44 magnum at Megaman!
His head is blown apart!
Megaman sucks one last breath through the neck hole and dies.
ZOMBIE! MEGAMAN'S A ZOMBIE!
Post by: Megaman on April 28, 2011, 04:20:11 pm
Not really.*gasp*Liberal Crime Squad insulting Liberals? BLASPHEMY!I'm still here, pal.
CONSERVATIVE! CONSERVATIIIIIVEEE!
AoD fires his .44 magnum at Megaman!
His head is blown apart!
Megaman sucks one last breath through the neck hole and dies.
ZOMBIE! MEGAMAN'S A ZOMBIE!
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 28, 2011, 04:21:48 pm
Alright, I think I've shitposted enough.
Post by: Criptfeind on April 28, 2011, 04:23:22 pm
Post by: Angel Of Death on April 28, 2011, 04:26:53 pm
And yet, you keep doing it.YOU MUST BE A ZOMBIE, TOO!
Alright, to keep on topic, my thingy on the grid was about here (http://i.imgur.com/ZFbOt.gif).
I forgot to save the real thing, so this'll have to do.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 28, 2011, 04:27:46 pm
There are those levels in some games where you can collect like, three dozen lives. He's probably been there recently.Not really.*gasp*Liberal Crime Squad insulting Liberals? BLASPHEMY!I'm still here, pal.
CONSERVATIVE! CONSERVATIIIIIVEEE!
AoD fires his .44 magnum at Megaman!
His head is blown apart!
Megaman sucks one last breath through the neck hole and dies.
ZOMBIE! MEGAMAN'S A ZOMBIE!
Post by: Myroc on April 28, 2011, 04:41:12 pm
He has a tendency to respawn like that. Really annoying when you're a mad scientist with intent of World Domination.There are those levels in some games where you can collect like, three dozen lives. He's probably been there recently.Not really.*gasp*Liberal Crime Squad insulting Liberals? BLASPHEMY!I'm still here, pal.
CONSERVATIVE! CONSERVATIIIIIVEEE!
AoD fires his .44 magnum at Megaman!
His head is blown apart!
Megaman sucks one last breath through the neck hole and dies.
ZOMBIE! MEGAMAN'S A ZOMBIE!
Post by: Lagslayer on April 29, 2011, 01:01:32 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I suppose I'd consider my political views closest to the center-right, but I'm reluctant to brand myself with any particular group label. I'm an individual, dammit!
Post by: Megaman on April 29, 2011, 01:04:10 am
I suppose I'd consider my political views closest to the center-right, but I'm reluctant to brand myself with any particular group label. I'm an individual, dammit!No one is truly individual. Deal with it.
Post by: Ancre on April 29, 2011, 09:48:26 am
I suppose I'd consider my political views closest to the center-right, but I'm reluctant to brand myself with any particular group label. I'm an individual, dammit!
Alright, time for the political spectrum quiz. (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
Try this test and be a left libertarian like everybody else ! :D
Post by: TherosPherae on April 29, 2011, 09:54:50 am
I'm an individual, dammit!Yep, you're unique. Just like everybody else. :P
And gosh danget Ancre, not everybody ended up being a left libertarian. I ended up being a little bit right of center.
Post by: PremierMeridian on April 29, 2011, 10:12:05 am
But what is quotaism? (warning, wall of text)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutchling on April 29, 2011, 12:17:34 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I have no idea what they mean with the last two but usually I end up as Right Authoritarian...
EDIT: spoilered it
Post by: Korgus on April 29, 2011, 12:37:59 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MorleyDev on April 29, 2011, 01:08:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Makes sense since my attitude to a lot of those questions are "I don't really care..." or "I'm not an economist, I cannot give an answer."...Basically I'm slightly liberal and slightly left-wing but very apathetic XD
Post by: Ancre on April 29, 2011, 01:44:48 pm
Post by: Vector on April 29, 2011, 01:54:03 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bdthemag on April 29, 2011, 03:45:50 pm
Post by: USEC_OFFICER on April 29, 2011, 04:22:59 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Thought I'd be more authoritarian, but otherwise everything is as I expected (ie. Liberal, respecting other countries/races' rights and cultures).
Post by: Eagle_eye on April 30, 2011, 12:13:57 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
not exactly surprised..
Post by: MaximumZero on April 30, 2011, 10:22:40 pm
Post by: Ricky on April 30, 2011, 10:34:10 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I don't know what that means, besides being somewhat liberal
Post by: Duuvian on April 30, 2011, 11:49:27 pm
I am a left social libertarian
Left: 3.57, Libertarian: 3.63
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/13x27.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -4.08
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n30.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -4.36
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c28.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
Post by: Jack A T on May 01, 2011, 02:49:53 am
I am a far-left social libertarian
Left: 7.85, Libertarian: 4.07
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/4x28.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -8.37
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n8.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
My Culture War Stance
Score: -7.4
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c13.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on May 03, 2011, 04:44:01 pm
My Political Views
I am a far-left moderate social libertarian
Left: 7.59, Libertarian: 2.33
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/5x25.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
Haha oh wow, changed a few answers and got this -
My Political Views
I am a far-left social libertarian
Left: 9.16, Libertarian: 3.72
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/2x27.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
Post by: Lagslayer on May 03, 2011, 07:10:53 pm
I am a right moderate social libertarian
Right: 4.33, Libertarian: 1.95
(http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/29x24.gif)
Political Spectrum Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html)
About what I expected.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 04, 2011, 05:24:50 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Next! (http://www.gotoquiz.com/personality_plus_1)
Your Result: Melancholy
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
80% Melancholy
76% Phlegmatic
36% Choleric
10% Sanguine
I do still take suggestions, in the event any of you have somthing more interesting.
Post by: MaximumZero on May 04, 2011, 05:31:00 pm
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
70% Phlegmatic
60% Melancholy
40% Sanguine
30% Choleric
Post by: Diablous on May 04, 2011, 05:47:58 pm
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
83% Phlegmatic
40% Melancholy
34% Sanguine
17% Choleric
Post by: Earthquake Damage on May 04, 2011, 05:54:11 pm
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
86% Phlegmatic
57% Melancholy
22% Sanguine
9% Choleric
I'm seeing a trend here. :P
Also, far too many questions had either no options that stood out or two that were equally valid. That's probably deliberate.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on May 04, 2011, 05:57:08 pm
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
77% Melancholy
69% Phlegmatic
17% Sanguine
9% Choleric
Post by: Tarran on May 04, 2011, 05:59:44 pm
Sanguine - the extrovert, the talker, and the optimist.
Result Breakdown:
66% Sanguine <<
66% Phlegmatic <<Woo, tied results.
46% Choleric
26% Melancholy
Not 100% sure if I answered everything right as I'm not 100% sure of myself, but I believe I've answered everything mostly right.
Post by: Ochita on May 04, 2011, 06:03:43 pm
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
80% Phlegmatic
56% Melancholy
46% Sanguine
20% Choleric
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on May 04, 2011, 06:06:13 pm
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
86% Melancholy
86% Phlegmatic
20% Sanguine
10% Choleric
Post by: FuzzyZergling on May 04, 2011, 06:28:53 pm
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
86% Phlegmatic
66% Melancholy
26% Choleric
20% Sanguine
Post by: Vector on May 04, 2011, 08:22:32 pm
The extrovert, the doer, the optimist.
Choleric 74%
Melancholy 27%
Sanguine 24%
Phlegmatic 11%
More like "the ragingly angry and obsessive," but okay.
Post by: ein on May 04, 2011, 08:31:27 pm
56% Phlegmatic
50% Sanguine
10% Choleric
Yup.
Post by: ToonyMan on May 04, 2011, 08:31:43 pm
Your Result: Melancholy
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist. To view further information about the Melancholy personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
76% Melancholy
76% Phlegmatic
36% Choleric
16% Sanguine
Quiz Created on GoTo Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/)
Melancholy and Phlegmatic are tied. :P
Post by: Leafsnail on May 04, 2011, 08:49:49 pm
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist. To view further information about the Phlegmatic personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
74% Phlegmatic
41% Melancholy
11% Choleric
11% Sanguine
Post by: Christes on May 04, 2011, 09:53:38 pm
Your Result: Phlegmatic
Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist. To view further information about the Phlegmatic personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
83% Phlegmatic
60% Melancholy
17% Choleric
9% Sanguine
Quiz Created on GoTo Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/)
I'm surprised Sanguine was that high tbh.
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on May 04, 2011, 10:05:56 pm
Your Result: Sanguine
Sanguine - the extrovert, the talker, and the optimist. To view further information about the Sanguine personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
66% Sanguine
66% Melancholy
56% Choleric
16% Phlegmatic
Quiz Created on GoTo Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/)
Barely... same % as Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Post by: Itnetlolor on May 04, 2011, 10:14:19 pm
Your Result: Melancholy
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist. To view further information about the Melancholy personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
76% Melancholy
56% Phlegmatic
46% Choleric
26% Sanguine
Quiz Created on GoTo Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/)
Makes sense at least in the most recent context.
EDIT: Political spectrum (Pretty damn neutral; Center, Center)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: sonerohi on May 04, 2011, 10:21:33 pm
Your Result: Melancholy
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
70% Melancholy
70% Choleric
56% Phlegmatic
6% Sanguine
Post by: Gunner-Chan on May 04, 2011, 10:39:35 pm
Personality Plus
Your Result: Melancholy
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
86% Melancholy
31% Sanguine
31% Phlegmatic
26% Choleric
Post by: sonerohi on May 04, 2011, 10:40:31 pm
Post by: Gunner-Chan on May 04, 2011, 10:43:04 pm
Post by: Osmosis Jones on May 04, 2011, 10:49:20 pm
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist. To view further information about the Melancholy personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
77% Melancholy
74% Phlegmatic
9% Choleric
9% Sanguine
Heh, melancholic more then phlegmatic, but only just. :P
Post by: GlyphGryph on May 04, 2011, 10:56:50 pm
Done:
Your Result: Sanguine
Sanguine - the extrovert, the talker, and the optimist. To view further information about the Sanguine personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
66% Sanguine
66% Melancholy
46% Phlegmatic
26% Choleric
Though it varies quite a bit by changing the answers on the 3 or 4 questions I wasn't sure which to go with. General consensus? Not choleric!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 04, 2011, 11:13:11 pm
Post by: Darvi on May 04, 2011, 11:26:46 pm
Sanguine - the extrovert, the talker, and the optimist.
Result Breakdown:
56% Sanguine
56% Melancholy
46% Choleric
40% Phlegmatic
Wow. I'm a bloody melancholic! *rimshot*
Post by: Heron TSG on May 04, 2011, 11:32:53 pm
Choleric - the extrovert, the doer, the optimist.
Result Breakdown:
66% Choleric
60% Melancholy
40% Sanguine
36% Phlegmatic
Doer: yup. Optimist: yup. Extrovert: hell no.
Post by: Darvi on May 04, 2011, 11:34:01 pm
Flippin' bipolarism
Post by: Vector on May 04, 2011, 11:36:24 pm
Doer: yup. Optimist: yup. Extrovert: hell no.
Haha, I thought it was kind of funny, myself, because I didn't agree with any of the assessments.
Doer, no, optimist, not especially, extrovert, not exactly. Hohoho.
I guess stubbornness => choleric, though.
Post by: Solifuge on May 05, 2011, 12:31:36 pm
Result Breakdown:
60% Sanguine (the extrovert, the talker, and the optimist)
60% Melancholic (the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist)
50% Phlegmatic
30% Choleric
It hit the whole "introverted entertainer" thing pretty well, and I'm pretty danged easygoing and diplomacy-oriented. The even 10s make me happy too.
EDIT: I didn't care for the test much, since the options were chosen as gimmicks (alliteration ho!), and many of them had multiple results which I express evenly. Should've been designed as hypothetical situations, or in a ranking system that did a Agree/Ambivalent/Disagree spectrum for each.
</fruitless critique>
Post by: GlyphGryph on May 05, 2011, 03:11:11 pm
All of them I've seen are like this
Post by: Darkwind3 on May 05, 2011, 03:38:18 pm
Choleric - the extrovert, the doer, the optimist.
Result Breakdown:
80% Choleric
50% Sanguine
46% Melancholy
26% Phlegmatic
Wait. What? This is unexpected.
As a side note, I am 85% Ohio. I am reasonably sure the state has more than 1.2 people.
Post by: Burnt Pies on May 05, 2011, 03:43:35 pm
Result Breakdown:
86% Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
66% Melancholic
36% Sanguine
10% Choleric
Sounds about right. Definitely introverted and pessimistic. The watcher fits fairly well too.
Post by: Criptfeind on May 05, 2011, 05:54:56 pm
Melancholy - the introvert, the thinker, and the pessimist.
Result Breakdown:
86% Melancholy
66% Phlegmatic
46% Choleric
6% Sanguine
Post by: blackmagechill on May 05, 2011, 06:02:43 pm
Post by: CJ1145 on May 05, 2011, 06:13:04 pm
Your Result: Sanguine
Sanguine - the extrovert, the talker, and the optimist. To view further information about the Sanguine personality type, visit personalityplus.awardspace.info
Result Breakdown:
91% Sanguine
34% Choleric
31% Phlegmatic
17% Melancholy
Quiz Created on GoTo Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/)
Holy shit.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 09, 2011, 05:18:14 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
That's right folks, we're back in business. This time around, the test is of your general quality of life. (http://www.monkeyquiz.com/life/rate_my_life.html) The poll will be about your mean average.
So, I'll start us off.
Life: 5
Mind: 5.3
Body: 4.5
Spirit: 7
Friends/Family: 3
Love: 0
Finance: 3.2
I can see that love is really bringing my average down here, and in a twist of irony spirit is really high. I was expecting the former, but certainly not the latter.
Post by: Max White on August 09, 2011, 05:20:43 pm
What?
Over there, see, in the distance...
Where? I don't see it!
Right there! It's getting bigger, I think it is coming this way!
Oh, I see... What is that?
I think it's the SHIT, LET'S BE THREAD!! Were back baby!
Well this was a fun necro!
Post by: Darvi on August 09, 2011, 05:21:10 pm
Also, if I have two half-brothers, how many siblings do I have?
Post by: MaximumZero on August 09, 2011, 05:23:08 pm
Mind: 6.3
Body: 4.7
Spirit: 6.7
Friends/Family: 7.4
Love: 7.3
Finance: 4.1
Huh. How 'bout that.
Post by: Bdthemag on August 09, 2011, 05:25:05 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on August 09, 2011, 05:25:31 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 09, 2011, 05:25:51 pm
I cannot participate because apparently asexuality is not a thing.Then leave that field blank.
Quote
Also, if I have two half-brothers, how many siblings do I have?2, they're still your blood relatives by 50%.
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 09, 2011, 05:27:13 pm
Mind: 2.6
Body: 5
Spirit: 4.5
Friends/Family: 3.5
Love: 7.7
Finance: 1.9
Frankly, I don't see how body is that high but meh
Post by: Phmcw on August 09, 2011, 05:28:17 pm
Mind: 6.4
Body: 8.2
Spirit: 7.5
Friends/Family: 5.3
Love: 4.3
Finance: 5.5
Post by: Diablous on August 09, 2011, 05:29:26 pm
Mind: 6.9
Body: 7.3
Spirit: 5.4
Friends/Family: 5.3
Love: 0.8
Finance: 5.2
Not that bad, I guess, with the exception of love.
Post by: Darvi on August 09, 2011, 05:29:42 pm
Post by: Vector on August 09, 2011, 05:33:35 pm
Mind: 6.9
Body: 7
Spirit: 7.9
Friends/family: 2.9
Love: 2.1
Finance: 6.1
... Hahaha =) I guess my life will get a lot better over time!
Post by: Darvi on August 09, 2011, 05:39:19 pm
Mind: 4.7
Body: 6.9
Spirit: 3.2
Friends/Family: 2.6
Love: 1.5
Finance: 3.9
Eh. happens if you're a single young adult who's not in his right mind and lives with his parents.
Post by: Heliman on August 09, 2011, 06:04:43 pm
Life: 7.4
Mind: 7.4
Body: 7.3
Spirit: 9.1
Friends/Family: 3.5
Love: 0
Finance: 7.9
Hey, pretty good. Apparently I have a ridiculous amount of spirit. Seriously, I'm not even religious.
Also, a zero in love. I FEEL NO LOVE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_U6mWu1XQA):(
Post by: Levi on August 09, 2011, 06:10:58 pm
Mind: 6.2
Body: 7.8
Spirit: 4.5
Friends/Family: 3.5
Love: 1.5
Finance: 6.9
Who needs love anyway! :D
Post by: Simmura McCrea on August 09, 2011, 06:11:37 pm
Mind: 5.3
Body: 7.3
Spirit: 3.5
Friends/Family: 2.4
Love: 1.5
Finance: 3.9
I have no idea where the love came from.
Post by: Solifuge on August 09, 2011, 06:11:57 pm
Mind: 6.5
Body: 6.7
Spirit: 8.6
Friends/Family: 5.9
Love: 2.1
Finance: 4.2
Love is a funny thing. The friends I have in my life do a pretty good job of satisfying my need for strong emotional connections to others, so I'm comfortable letting relationship prospects take their time. I guess I feel pretty spiritually fulfilled... comfortable being agnostic, while still learning about human spirituality. I would have expected my finance score to be lower, though... I am far from in a good position right now, though I guess things will be getting better soon.
Post by: Patchouli on August 09, 2011, 06:22:08 pm
I: 78%
N: 12%
T: 50%
J: 1%
Your Result: Phlegmatic - the introvert, the watcher, and the pessimist.
Life: 6.8
Mind: 7
Body: 7.1
Spirit: 5.4
Friends/Family: 4.7
Love: 4.3
Finance: 6.6
Body is a mystery, since I just laze around all day. I guess that's why it's not a 10, but still. I don't know how mind is so high as well.
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 09, 2011, 06:27:55 pm
I can do a passable imitation of a CD rack and I got 5
Post by: Darvi on August 09, 2011, 06:31:38 pm
Post by: Patchouli on August 09, 2011, 06:35:07 pm
Post by: Max White on August 09, 2011, 06:39:21 pm
Mind: 4.9
Body: 6.7
Spirit: 3.5
Friends/Family: 3.7
Love: 6.9
Finance: 4.2
Well ok!
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 09, 2011, 06:39:58 pm
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 09, 2011, 06:40:48 pm
Mind: 6.9
Body: 7.8
Spirit: 6
Friends/Family: 3.8
Love: 1.5
Finance: 4.2
Because screw relationships.
Post by: Max White on August 09, 2011, 06:46:37 pm
Sorry Max, I can't :/It's ok, I can wait for you! :P
Also, what are we talking about?
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 09, 2011, 06:47:35 pm
Post by: Max White on August 09, 2011, 06:49:40 pm
Post by: Grimshot on August 09, 2011, 06:49:46 pm
Mind 3.6
Body 4.9
Spirit 3.5
Friends/Family 1.5
Love 0
Finance 2.1
Ha...
Post by: Darvi on August 09, 2011, 06:50:59 pm
I'm one of the 4 people who actually read your signature :PWho're the other 2?
Post by: Taricus on August 09, 2011, 06:54:13 pm
Other one, to be precise...I'm one of the 4 people who actually read your signature :PWho're the other 2?
EDIT: Raises hand.
Post by: darkrider2 on August 09, 2011, 07:07:05 pm
body: 7.1
spirit: 4
friends/family: 2.9
love: 0
finance: 4.5
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 09, 2011, 07:13:06 pm
Spoiler: And the results: (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Where I am good/need improvements: (click to show/hide)
:Looks at others: Whelp, at least I'm not the only one with a crappy Love score. No real surprise there. ;D
However, it is pretty sad that I'm at my later-mid 20s and am still, since way back, finding great difficulty with the ladies. At least on the bright side, I gave up on looking, and am just enjoying the solitude. Plus, hey, at least I won't be obligated to change most-all my plans just to keep a relationship going. One thing to be devoted, but going to those degrees is comically cruel.
Post by: Tarran on August 09, 2011, 07:14:55 pm
Mind: 5.4 (There are a lot of questions that are hard to answer since I'm home schooled).
Body: 6.1 (What. Seriously? I picked quite a few unhealthy questions and I'm still slightly above average? Well, I guess me not having any illnesses bumped this up by a lot).
Spirit: 4.5 (Yeah, that sounds about right).
Friends: 3 (Sadly true. :|).
Love: 0 (I would be surprised if it was anything but. Apparently the 0 indicates trouble. What if I just feel too young to start dating, huh? Yeesh).
Finance: 3.9 (Seriously? Are you kidding? I literally own no money to my own name and this is non-zero? Also, apparently this is a problem at my age).
Post by: Lectorog on August 09, 2011, 07:20:43 pm
Mind: 7
Body: 6.9
Spirit: 4
Friends/Family: 4.7
Love: 0
Finance: 4.8
I'm sure the fact that I'm still in high school skewed it a bit. Amusing that I got a 4.8 in finance, even though I have no income. And body 6.9, even though I don't excercise more than once a week and am marginally underweight.
Post by: Dr.Feelgood on August 09, 2011, 07:40:07 pm
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 09, 2011, 07:47:41 pm
Post by: Max White on August 09, 2011, 07:54:36 pm
Post by: Dsarker on August 09, 2011, 08:12:16 pm
Life: 7.3
Mind: 7.2
Body: 8
Spirit: 7.5
Family: 4.4
Love: 1.5
Finance: 6.5
Now, I've got little idea of why my body is so high or my finance is so high. I'm dependent on my family (don't have a licence so no job for me), and I exercise very occasionally.
Love I can understand. I'm single and I will be for another three years, after which I'm going to be celibate.
Post by: Vector on August 09, 2011, 08:13:14 pm
That's pretty cool!
Post by: Dsarker on August 09, 2011, 08:14:48 pm
Post by: Vector on August 09, 2011, 08:16:01 pm
... I guess that's just another Vector-thing, but anyway, best of luck to you.
Post by: Dsarker on August 09, 2011, 08:17:10 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on August 09, 2011, 08:19:18 pm
Mind: 5.7
Body: 7.8
Spirit: 8.2
Friends/Family: 5.3
Love: 5
Finance: 3.5
My life is wonderful!
I am surprised I got a 5 on love. The test isn't really that accurate though since I have a honed mind and a very wimpy body :P
Post by: Heron TSG on August 09, 2011, 10:28:27 pm
Mind:6.3
Body:7.5
Spirit: 9
Friends/Family: 5.4
Love: 2.9
Finance: 6.8
Your Life Analysis:
Life: Your life rating is a score of the sum total of your life, and accounts for how satisfied, successful, balanced, capable, valuable, and happy you are. The quiz attempts to put a number on the summation of all of these things, based on your answers. Your life score leaves room for improvement. You can make changes to improve your trouble areas, and this will bring you greater satisfaction. Focus on your weakest points and set about to change them. Do not delay your happiness and success.
Mind: Your mind rating is a score of your mind's clarity, ability, and health. Higher scores indicate an advancement in knowledge, clear and capable thinking, high mental health, and pure thought free of interference. Your mind score is not bad, but could be improved upon. Your mental health is not weak, but you are not achieving full mental clarity and function. Learn how to unclutter your mind. Keep learning, keep improving, continue moving forward. ((But I live to clutter my mind. Learning everything means I have to fill my brain, not clean it out...))
Body: Your body rating measures your body's health, fitness, and general wellness. A healthy body contributes to a happy life, however many of us are lacking in this area. You have a rather good body score, which is an indication that you take care of yourself. There is room for improvement, however. Please keep doing what works. Eat right, exercise, reduce your stress, treat any illness. Doing these things will help ensure your body will be in good working order for a long time to come. Read advice from other quiz-takers on improving the body. ((Do what I've always done to get better at being healthier? Eh?))
Spirit: Your spirit rating seeks to capture in a number that elusive quality which is found in your faith, your attitude, and your philosophy on life. A higher score indicates a greater sense of inner peace and balance. Your spirit score is dramatic. Continue on your path, do not stray. Continue to reap the rewards which your spirituality brings forth. ((*SNRK* I have no spirituality at all. I have morals, but I don't even believe in a spirit. Death is death is death.))
Friends/Family: Your friends and family rating measures your relationships with those around you, and is based on how large, healthy, and dependable your social network is. Your friends and family score is not bad but can be improved. Maintain your current social net, while you try to expand it. Try new things and form new friendships. You will be rewarded greatly. ((HA! Way ahead of you, E-test.))
Love: Your love rating is a measure of your current romantic situation. Sharing your heart with another person is one of life's most glorious, terrifying, rewarding experiences. Your love score is very low, indicating trouble. There is love out there for you. Seek the advice of wise people on how to go about finding it. Do not lose hope. ((I'm good for now, thanks.))
Finance: Your finance rating is a score that rates your current financial health and stability. You have a rather good financial score, which is not all that common these days. Keep doing what works. Avoid common pitfalls and save for the future. You will be glad you did. ((Strange, considering that I currently DO NOT HAVE finances.))
I think the stupidest part of this quiz was the part about being able to quote a holy text. Sure, I know some quotes. "I am become death, destroyer of worlds", "Let there be light", and such things don't really mean aught for spirituality.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 09, 2011, 10:34:29 pm
Or something.
Post by: Dsarker on August 09, 2011, 10:40:25 pm
I think that the quiz-maker was under the assumption that knowing some religious text by heart would you were in some way commited to a religion, and therefore more spiritually held-together.
Or something.
Or that he meant being able to quote a religious text and explain what it means.
Post by: Grakelin on August 09, 2011, 10:46:32 pm
Mind: 6.3
Body: 6.8
Spirit: 5
Friends/Family: 3.7
Love: 4
Finance: 5.2
Somewhat flawed, though still on line with many other unscientific polls. I always seem to get a high 'body' score (and I was ranked as a 'kinesthetic learner'), but my metabolism continues to be too fast to gain any weight even in adulthood, and I have below-average lower arm strength.
Post by: CJ1145 on August 09, 2011, 10:49:51 pm
Mind: 6.6
Body: 8
Spirit: 8.3
Friends/Family: 6.7
Love: 0.8
Finance: 6.1
Love was expected. Nobody wubs me :'(
I was extremely surprised both by my body and spirit scores though.
Post by: ToonyMan on August 09, 2011, 11:01:28 pm
Mind: 5.2
Body: 5.5
Spirit: 5
Friends/Family: 3.8
Love: 1.5
Finance: 4.5
:\
Spoiler: Your Life Analysis (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on August 09, 2011, 11:18:01 pm
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on August 09, 2011, 11:21:53 pm
Mind: 5.6
Body: 7.1
Spirit: 5
Friends/Family: 3.7
Love: 0
Finance: 5.5
I am puzzled by my surprisingly high body rating.
Post by: thatkid on August 09, 2011, 11:22:35 pm
Mind: 5.2
Body: 4.1
Spirit: 5
Friends/Family: 2.6
Love: 0
Finance: 4.5
Post by: ToonyMan on August 09, 2011, 11:25:21 pm
Don't worry my man, there are plenty of us 5s to go around to raise that Friends stat. Welcome to the club. :PIt's just really five-y. It feels like whenever I take a personality test I always average out.
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 09, 2011, 11:28:51 pm
Mind: 6.8
Body: 8
Spirit: 9.6
Friends/Family: 5.6
Love: 5
Finance: 7.4
Oh what.
My spirit is indefatigable. That's nice. ^-^
Post by: Bauglir on August 09, 2011, 11:30:34 pm
Post by: Tarran on August 09, 2011, 11:34:33 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 09, 2011, 11:35:47 pm
Post by: Tarran on August 09, 2011, 11:36:33 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 09, 2011, 11:38:08 pm
What, can't we have two?So has been decreed by the Council of the Twelfth Bay.
Post by: Dsarker on August 09, 2011, 11:38:23 pm
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 09, 2011, 11:57:18 pm
Quote from: Post-quiz
Your Spirit score is very high, much higher than the average. If you wouldn't mind, please take a little time to explain how you manage to succeed so well at this aspect of your life. Your words may be read by someone else who scored very low. Take a moment to give them some useful advice. Your thoughts are very much appreciated.That's a terrible idea.
Let's see. Watched loved ones die when I was very young. Visited the concentration camps of Europe as a child. Dealt with gangs and prostitutes as a teenager in seedy Thailand. Fell in head over heels in love with a girl that was sexually abused as a child when he was 14. Nearly committed suicide himself after. Watched many of his friends lose minds due to drugs and some commit suicide back stateside. Stood atop countless corpses at the Killing Fields in Cambodia. Was involved in relief efforts following two tsunamis. Watched an 18 year old kid get stabbed in the chest and killed right in front of him. Got self deported from Myanmar for attacking a pimp of a child prostitute and bribed his way out of the ensuing shitstorm. Still fighting bipolar disorder which was misdiagnosed for years. Constantly feels an awareness of emotions, thoughts, dreams of billions of living people. Sees the worst and best of humanity. Spent time as a monk pursuing the answers to life, the universe, and everything. Atheist, Humanist, Buddhist, post-positivist, post-labelist constructivist that would rather bullshit and joke around when he's not constantly fighting... fighting... fighting suffering. It doesn't need to be this way even though it's the way it always goes. I have to believe in the good within people, within their abilities to positively change their environment - or I would have died a long time ago. There's a beauty in everything, a certain rhythmic dance to the tune of the music of 7 billion beating hearts and buzzing minds, the vibrations of the Earth-planet that we all call home, the minute harmonics of the cells, atoms, sub-atomic particles, energy that binds us all together with the stars.
I'm a spiritual guy that doesn't believe in spirits. I believe in us. I believe in myself. That's all.
edit: grammar.
Post by: ToonyMan on August 09, 2011, 11:59:30 pm
Post by: Nivim on August 10, 2011, 12:07:17 am
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 10, 2011, 12:10:59 am
But you guys already know that 99.9% of what I do is bullshit. So I'm comfortable with sharing certain thoughts here ;)
Wouldn't want anyone thinking that I'm deep or anything.
Post by: Vector on August 10, 2011, 12:18:17 am
Religious text: quoted.
It's like the test administrators didn't write the thing with logical answers in mind...
Post by: Patchouli on August 10, 2011, 12:21:05 am
And Kael once again makes me feel like I belong in the shallow end of the pool.
Post by: Heron TSG on August 10, 2011, 12:25:41 am
Qur'an: "Mohammed"
Bible: "Lord"
Torah: "Yahweh/God"
Bhagavad Gita: "I am become Death, destroyer of Worlds"
Avestan Texts: "Ahriman"
But that more says that I'm a smartass than a religious nut.
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 10, 2011, 12:28:48 am
And Kael once again makes me feel like I belong in the shallow end of the pool.Nope. Don't do that to yourself. There's a barely apperceivable love that permeates the entire cosmos.
The understanding of it is something that I have glimpsed on occasion. I'm still trying, just as everyone else.
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 12:36:58 am
"Jesus wept."
Religious text: quoted.
It's like the test administrators didn't write the thing with logical answers in mind...
Why not go with another old classic?
"And Elisha cursed them in the name of the LORD, and two she-bears came out of the woods and mauled forty two of them to death."
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 10, 2011, 12:40:09 am
Even the god of the fan-fic Book of Mormon I+II is much preferred.
Post by: Nivim on August 10, 2011, 12:47:23 am
But you guys already know that 99.9% of what I do is bullshit. So I'm comfortable with sharing certain thoughts here ;)Then I guess I aught to integrate a little of your awesome into what I'm writting for it, although it'll be hard since I don't have overlap for most of it.
Wouldn't want anyone thinking that I'm deep or anything.
Post by: Pnx on August 10, 2011, 12:58:51 am
Mind 3.4
Body 5.5
Spirit 4.1
Friends/Family 2.9
Love 1.4
Finance 4.8
I have a sucky life. Go figure. By all rights I shouldn't but I don't feel disinclined to agree. But never mind that.
Anyway, so the closest I generally come to spiritualism is the rare lapse into contemplation on how surreal life feels to me (which can get fairly intense). Religious texts while sometimes interesting for purely academic reasons, have completely failed to give me any useful lessons I didn't already know. My beliefs are wedged firmly in agnostic with a lean toward nihilistic. I feel that the question of "is there or is there not a god/overarching plan/intelligible guiding force in the universe" is academic, since it seems pretty clear we just have to figure things out for ourselves. Relying on or expecting anything else to guide us is just silly, and leads to hurt. I also believe everyone has to figure things out for themselves. Partly because nobody else in the world seems in a position to actually know better, but mostly because in the belief game, earning your answers is a thousand times more valuable than being given them. Even if it is hard work, and sometimes unpleasant.
I dunno reality is a surreal, infinite series of points that are positioned relative to each other and can only be perceived relative to each other, and are perceived differently depending on which points you are using to perceive those points, and then things get complicated.
I can't be the only one here who is occasionally overwhelmed with the sense of how surreal reality is, how strange it is that I'm this bundle of neurons, this collection of consciousness, in this vast complex reality... can I? I get the feeling I'm making no sense at all.
Post by: Vector on August 10, 2011, 01:00:02 am
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 01:02:24 am
Post by: Patchouli on August 10, 2011, 01:04:06 am
I can't be the only one here who is occasionally overwhelmed with the sense of how surreal reality is, how strange it is that I'm this bundle of neurons, this collection of consciousness, in this vast complex reality... can I? I get the feeling I'm making no sense at all.Not alone, I think most people think about that. I remember being part of the school's crossing guard, and sometimes, we would talk about the mindblowing-ness of reality.
Post by: Angel Of Death on August 10, 2011, 01:05:05 am
Mind: 3.7
Body: 4.1
Spirit: 3.5
Friends/Family: 3.5
Love: 1.4
Finance: 2.9
I think I can agree with this.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 01:13:51 am
The god of the Old Testament was a dick. New Testament god is a pretty chill dude.I wouldn't exactly say that the New Testament god is a chill dude.
Quote from: Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 10, 2011, 01:17:59 am
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 01:19:17 am
The god of the Old Testament was a dick. New Testament god is a pretty chill dude.I wouldn't exactly say that the New Testament god is a chill dude.Quote from: Ephesians 6:5Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Because the master is a representative of Christ. He also tells the masters to stop even threatening their slaves. You have to understand, at this time in history, unless you are a roman citizen, if you are male, you could become a slave AT ANY TIME. And if you were female, even if you were.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 01:20:44 am
And I don't care. Slavery was wrong then, it was wrong in the 1800's, and it's still wrong now.The god of the Old Testament was a dick. New Testament god is a pretty chill dude.I wouldn't exactly say that the New Testament god is a chill dude.Quote from: Ephesians 6:5Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ.
Because the master is a representative of Christ. He also tells the masters to stop even threatening their slaves. You have to understand, at this time in history, unless you are a roman citizen, if you are male, you could become a slave AT ANY TIME. And if you were female, even if you were.
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 01:30:03 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 01:36:24 am
Of course, that's going with Jesus as a philosopher. If he were really the Son of God and really a good person, I'd expect him to channel some Old Testament Yahweh to dispose Caesar and turn Imperial Rome into a just society.
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 01:49:16 am
Except the Nazis control the known world. They enforce peace. Anyone who does rebel is either made a slave or executed. People are largely free to do what they want, and the only people grumbling are the Jews, who have a largely autonomous country, and are given religious freedom. But these Nazis have slaves. Only problem is that they keep the slaves well treated. In fact, harming a slave is a crime. Not to mention that a large amount of administrative work is done by both slaves and freedmen.
Your average slave, in this hypothetical Nazi empire, has no access to any weapons. If he's lucky, he might have a hoe or pitchfork. Maybe. Among these slaves are also a large quantity of what today would be known as pop stars. The average non-slave doesn't have a better lot than your average slave, and in fact is more likely to be starving in the street. And goodness help you if you get imprisoned. You face a slow death of starvation, and if you're unlucky, you might die of dehydration first. Because, you see, nobody feeds or waters the prisoners. Unless you have some friends, who might be able to bring food to you.
On the other hand, the military is a great life, and a lot of the poor are ready to join up. If you're not a Nazi, you will be by the end (which is worth it in itself, because without being a Nazi, you have basically no rights. Just that no-one bothers to harm you enough.), and if you ARE a Nazi, after those twenty five years, you get your own little farm to live on, with the slaves required to keep it running. Which you would be needing, because those slaves are far more likely to read than you are, so you'd do well to keep them happy. Or they might, you know, just decide to take a percentage of the profits for themselves.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 01:59:10 am
In any case, it's only right to rebel in this situation, given that we're living in a worldwide Nazi slave empire in your scenario. I don't care how well the slaves are treated. I don't care how much legal protection they have from abuse. They're slaves, and that's not right. There were a lot of places in the CSA where slavers would treat their slaves well to ensure that they got a good profit out of their harvests. That didn't make it alright, that just made these particular slavers pragmatic enough to realize that happy and healthy slaves are productive slaves.
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 02:05:42 am
You're basically saying that government should not enforce laws. That nobody should be restricted in anything they do. What's to stop someone killing off the lower class?
Post by: Miggy on August 10, 2011, 02:06:06 am
Life: 7.5
Mind: 7.3
Body: 8.8
Spirit: 7
Friends/Family: 3.5
Love: 1.4
Finance: 7.1
I don't see anything I would disagree, although perhaps that body is so high. I'm not unhealthy by any means, but I'm not super-duper healthy either, as that would suggest. I guess it just considers "not morbidly obese" and "pretty fit" to be so above average that it deserves a near-9.
But the overlying theme my test gave resonates pretty well with me: Life's pretty great, but I need to socialise more and I desperately need to get a girlfriend. That'll boost it from pretty great to absolutely fantastic.
Post by: Lysabild on August 10, 2011, 02:30:33 am
Pretty chill god in comparison to Old Testament god, Zeus, Thor, Shiva, Sekhmet, etc.
Huh? Thor? The dude that protected humanity from the natural forces of the world(aka Jotuns) are supposed to be mean? That's pretty much what he did. Just saying, but Thor is really malplaced on that list, Odin would've fitted better, though in general all the norse gods were pretty chill when it came to rules of what should be done on Midgård.
Also, the new testament keeps repeating that the old testament still counts and Jesus isn't really a nice guy if you actually read the bible.
Post by: Grakelin on August 10, 2011, 02:50:59 am
Life: 6.5
Mind: 6.7
Body: 6.5
Spirit: 5
Friends/Family: 4.7
Love: 4.3
Finance: 5.2
Life: 6.4
Mind: 6.3
Body: 6.8
Spirit: 5
Friends/Family: 3.7
Love: 4
Finance: 5.2
We have a lot of "0"s on Love here, it seems. Low scores seem pretty standard in that, unless you are in a steady relationship, since I was happy with my situation going through but got a low score.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 03:10:08 am
But it's the exact same thing.Indeed it was, as was your intent, but that's still not how any nazi group has ever acted.
Quote
You are talking about slavery in the Greco-Roman world as if it was only like the slavery that occured later on. While some of it undeniably was, a great portion of it WASN'T. Only instead of paying their workers in cash, they housed and fed them. And they trained them, as well. You might as well call them servants.
You don't own servants, and servants can quit any time they want.
Quote
And you know what? You are arguing for absolute freedom, when there is absolutely no chance of it succeeding.No, I am arguing for abolishing slavery because it is a horrible breach of human rights. Luckily, most of the world's slave trade has been destroyed by this point.
Quote
You either get crucified by the Romans, or on the off chance that your revolt succeeds, you no longer have protection given by the Romans, and the Gauls decide to make you their slaves. Which would be a hell of a lot more like the slaves of later eras.People aren't helpless because they aren't Romans. Let me make myself clear: There are a lot of things worse than getting killed, even than being tortured to death. Being complacent to a slave empire is, as far as I am concerned, one of those things.
Quote
You're basically saying that government should not enforce laws. That nobody should be restricted in anything they do. What's to stop someone killing off the lower class?That's actually not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that the government should not practice slavery, and the people of a government that practices slavery should rise up to stop them. A level of restriction is needed to live in a civilization, but not that much restriction is actually necessary and is just people imposing their will upon others. I should hope that the police would prevent people from trying to kill off the lower class.
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 03:22:32 am
Oh, there is another thing separating them: servants could usually get a different job. In Greco-Roman times, you were either a farmer, a low class criminal, a rich person, or a slave. In Rome, you also had the senator class.But it's the exact same thing.Indeed it was, as was your intent, but that's still not how any nazi group has ever acted.QuoteYou are talking about slavery in the Greco-Roman world as if it was only like the slavery that occured later on. While some of it undeniably was, a great portion of it WASN'T. Only instead of paying their workers in cash, they housed and fed them. And they trained them, as well. You might as well call them servants.
You don't own servants, and servants can quit any time they want.
Quote
What human rights? Unless you are a Roman Citizen, you don't have rights. And if you do, your rights basically consist of life and being able to be tried for your crimes by the Emperor. Other than that....QuoteAnd you know what? You are arguing for absolute freedom, when there is absolutely no chance of it succeeding.No, I am arguing for abolishing slavery because it is a horrible breach of human rights. Luckily, most of the world's slave trade has been destroyed by this point.
Quote
You are going to change NOTHING by your death. Really. In fact, you're more likely to make people scared enough by your death that they are less likely to try and change the order.QuoteYou either get crucified by the Romans, or on the off chance that your revolt succeeds, you no longer have protection given by the Romans, and the Gauls decide to make you their slaves. Which would be a hell of a lot more like the slaves of later eras.People aren't helpless because they aren't Romans. Let me make myself clear: There are a lot of things worse than getting killed, even than being tortured to death. Being complacent to a slave empire is, as far as I am concerned, one of those things.
Quote
In the same way you'd expect the city watch to prevent people killing outlaws? If you don't have citizenship, you have no rights whatsoever.QuoteYou're basically saying that government should not enforce laws. That nobody should be restricted in anything they do. What's to stop someone killing off the lower class?That's actually not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that the government should not practice slavery, and the people of a government that practices slavery should rise up to stop them. A level of restriction is needed to live in a civilization, but not that much restriction is actually necessary and is just people imposing their will upon others. I should hope that the police would prevent people from trying to kill off the lower class.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 03:30:21 am
Oh, there is another thing separating them: servants could usually get a different job. In Greco-Roman times, you were either a farmer, a low class criminal, a rich person, or a slave. In Rome, you also had the senator class.Hence why a change in direction would have done Rome some good.
Quote
What human rights? Unless you are a Roman Citizen, you don't have rights. And if you do, your rights basically consist of life and being able to be tried for your crimes by the Emperor. Other than that....So....what? I don't care what Imperial Rome thought of human rights.
Quote
You are going to change NOTHING by your death. Really. In fact, you're more likely to make people scared enough by your death that they are less likely to try and change the order.Not if it makes me, ironically enough, a martyr.
Quote
In the same way you'd expect the city watch to prevent people killing outlaws? If you don't have citizenship, you have no rights whatsoever.A person's rights should never be tied to their citizenship status. Rights are enumerated, not granted.
Here's what I don't think you understand: I think that Imperial Rome was bad. They were a theocratic dictatorship and a slave empire. That's immorality at its highest.
Post by: Lysabild on August 10, 2011, 03:31:51 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 03:36:40 am
There's no such thing as rights, all we have is privileges and they will be taken from us the moment the richer class thinks it's needed.You can't buy the world, Lysabild. You can try, and you might even make some headway, but you definitely can't succeed.
Post by: Duuvian on August 10, 2011, 03:37:20 am
I guess I'll take the quiz and see what the internet thinks of my life and compare to what I think of my life and then start yelling at my government as needed.
EDIT:
OP quiz I got
Your Type is
INTJ
Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
44 62 25 1
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 03:52:09 am
Oh, there is another thing separating them: servants could usually get a different job. In Greco-Roman times, you were either a farmer, a low class criminal, a rich person, or a slave. In Rome, you also had the senator class.Hence why a change in direction would have done Rome some good.QuoteWhat human rights? Unless you are a Roman Citizen, you don't have rights. And if you do, your rights basically consist of life and being able to be tried for your crimes by the Emperor. Other than that....So....what? I don't care what Imperial Rome thought of human rights.QuoteYou are going to change NOTHING by your death. Really. In fact, you're more likely to make people scared enough by your death that they are less likely to try and change the order.Not if it makes me, ironically enough, a martyr.QuoteIn the same way you'd expect the city watch to prevent people killing outlaws? If you don't have citizenship, you have no rights whatsoever.A person's rights should never be tied to their citizenship status. Rights are enumerated, not granted.
Here's what I don't think you understand: I think that Imperial Rome was bad. They were a theocratic dictatorship and a slave empire. That's immorality at its highest.
So you think a commentary on the time isn't altered by the time?
Post by: Angel Of Death on August 10, 2011, 03:52:30 am
Oops, I put 5 in since polls are at the top and I did that first, didn't realize there was a quiz until I paged down.Wrong quiz, dude.
I guess I'll take the quiz and see what the internet thinks of my life and compare to what I think of my life and then start yelling at my government as needed.
EDIT:
OP quiz I got
Your Type is
INTJ
Introverted Intuitive Thinking Judging
Strength of the preferences %
44 62 25 1
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 03:54:01 am
So you think a commentary on the time isn't altered by the time?Not really. It's a matter of degree, and the atrocities of Rome were way out of any sort of acceptable bounds, to say the least. It doesn't help that there wasn't a serious movement to change Rome into a progressive nation.
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 03:56:25 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2011, 04:02:12 am
In any case, what we are discussing is what I would do if suddenly thrust into Imperial Rome. Would I die? Most likely. Would I change anything? Probably not. But that doesn't matter to me. I will follow my moral code even if it drives me into an early and shallow grave.
The original issue I took with this, however, is not what I would do but what Jesus did not do when in this situation. That's part of what leads me to think he wasn't some all-powerful being of ultimate justice in human form, but just some guy who grew up in Imperial Rome. Hence, not the moral figure he is often portrayed as, which is what spurred this discussion.
Post by: Duuvian on August 10, 2011, 04:08:20 am
Life: 5.5
Mind: 6.7
Spirit: 7
Friends/Family 2.4
Love: 0
Finance: 2.4
EDIT: I interrupted quite the discussion didn't I? Should I voice my opinion? I think I will.
EDIT2: So I have this book called Daily Life in Ancient Rome. I always wondered why I left it sitting on my handsome red cabinet not being read by me. I suppose I will page through it and support both of your arguments that, yes, the Romans were some assholes and that Jesus was probably right in in sticking his neck out to try to change some stuff for all I know and yet he had to play by the barbaric (irony) rules of the day.
EDIT3: (From Daily Life in Ancient Rome, by Jerome Carcopino)
"Nor was this: they formed a barrier for autocracy against revolution. In the city there were 150,000 complete idlers supported by the generosity of the public assistance, and perhaps an equal number of workers who from one year's end to the other had no occupation after the hour of noon and yet were deprived of the right to devote their spare time to politics. The shows occupied the time of these people, procided a safety valve for their passions, distorted their instincts, and diverted their activity. A people that yawns is ripe for revolt. The Caesars saw to it that the Roman plebs suffered neither from hunger nor ennui. The spectacles were the great anodyne for their subjects' unemployment, and the sure instrument of their own absolutism. They shrewdly buttressed their power by surrounding the plebs with attentions and expending fabulous sums of money in the process."
More to follow in edits if no further posts are after me, or in a following post.
EDIT4: Chapter III SOCIETY AND SOCIAL CLASSES
I.ROMANS AND FOREIGNERS
At first sight Roman society appears to be divided into water-tight compartments and to bristle with barriers between class and class. All free-born men (ingenui), whether citizens of Rome or elsewhere, were in principle in a distinct category, radically seperated by their superiority of birth from the mass of slaves who were originally without rights, without guarentees, without personality, delivered over like a herd of brute beasts to the discretion of their master, and like a herd of beasts treated rather as inanimate objects than as sentient beings (res mancipi). Among the ingenui, again, there existed a profound distinction between the Roman citizen whom the law protected and the non-citizen who was merely subjected to the law. Finally the Roman citizens themselves were classified and their position on this ladder of rank determined by their fortunes.
Whereas under the republic there had been equality for all citizens before the law, in the empire of the second and third centuries a legal distinction arose which divided the citizen body into two classes: the 'honestiores' and the 'humiliores', also called plebeii or tenuiores. To the first class belonged Roman senators and knights with their families, soldiers and veterans with thier children, and men who held or had held municipal offices in towns and cities outside of Rome, with their descendants. All other citizens belonged to the second, and unless wealth or ability brought them into public office, they remained there.
The humiliores were subject to the most severe and humiliating punishments for infraction of the laws. They might be sent to the mines (ad metalla), thrown to the beasts in the amphitheatre, or crucified. The honestiores, on the other hand, enjoyed certain privileges. In case of grave misconduct, they were spared punishments which would tend to degrade their position in the eyes of the people and generally got off with banishment, relegation, or losing their property.
The two highest groups among the honestiores were known as "orders" (ordines) and were composed respectivly of senators and knights. The members of the lower or Equestrian Order had to possess a minumum of 400,000 sesterces (duuvnote: equivalent to $16,000 at the time of this book's printing {I assume the footnote 2 describes how they calculated this, probably something to do with gold}) If they were honoured by the confidence of the emperor they were then qualified to be given command of his auxiliary troops or to fulfill a certain number of civil functions reserved for them; they could become domanial or fiscal procurators, or governors of secondary provinces like those of the Alps or Mauretania. After Hadrian's time they could hold various posts in the imperial cabinet, and after Augustus they were eligible for any of the praefectures except that of praefectus urbi.
Next edit continues:
At the summit of the social scale was the Senatorial Order. A member of this order had to own at least 1,000,000 sesterces ($40,000). The emperor could at will appoint him to command his legions, to act as legate or proconsul in the most important provinces, to administer te chief services of the city, or to hold the highest posts in the priesthood. An ingenious hierarcgy gradually established barriers between the different ranks of the priveleged, and to make these demarcations more evident Harian bestowed on each variety its own exclusive title of nobility. Among the knights, "distinguished man" (vir perfectissimus) for a prefect-- unless he was a praetor, who was "most eminent" (vir eminentissimus), a title later restored by the Roman Church for the benefit of her cardinals; while the epithet "most famous" (vir carissimus) was reserved for the senator and his immediate relatives.
This exact and rigid system, whose ingenious variouns anticipate the elaborate hierarchy devised by Peter the Great, is paralleled by Napoeon's system of graded precedence in the army and the Legion of Honour. In Rome, where officers and functionaries came and went, it established a sort of social pyramid on the summit of which, midway between earth and heaven, the princeps was poised in lonely, incomparable majesty. (duuvnote: I think he means the emperor and ruling class were conveniently remote from the common people)
As his title indicates, the princeps was, in one sense, only the First of the Senate and of the People. In another sense, however, this primacy implied a difference not only of degree but of nature betwween himself and the rest of humanity. For the emperor, as incarnation of the law and guardian of the auspices, was closer to the gods than the ordinary human being, from whom he was seperated after his accession by his sacred character of "Augustus." He was the offspring of the the gods, and at death he would return to them after his apotheosis-- to be proclaimed divus himself in due course. In vain Trajan repudiated with scorn Domitian's claim to be addressed by the double title of "Master and God" (dominus et deus). He could not free himself from the toils of the cult which worshipped the imperial genius as represented in his person and which bound the incongrous federation of cities in East and West together in the universal empire (orbis Romanus). He had to endure hearing his decrees publicly hailed as "divine" by those whose wishes they fulfilled. (duuvnote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trajan)
Next:
Thus Rome appears a world petrified under a theocratic aristocracy, an inflexible structure composed of innumerable seperate compartments. On closer examination we find, however, that the partitions were by no means water-tight, and that powerful equalitarian currents never ceased to circulate, continually stirring up and renewing the elements of a society whose divisions were far from isolated. Not even the imperial house was proof against these currents. When the Julian family became extinct on the death of Nero, the principate was no longer the monopoly of one predestined clan or even of the city. As Tacitus expressed it, "The secret of empire was now disclosed--- that an emperor could be made elsewhere than at Rome."
Not the blood of Caesar or of Augustus henceforth conferrred that principate, but the loyalty of the Legions. Vespasian, legate of the East, Trajan, legate of Germany, were carried to supreme power, the former by the acclamations of his troops, the latter by the fear his army inspired and the confidence he himself inspired. Both rose to the divine imperial throne because they had first seized the pwoer which had the empire in it's gift, differing in this from Caligula, Claudius, or Nero, whose claims to empire lay in their dynasty's divinity. The legionaries who proclaimed Vespasian, the senators who compelled Nerva to adopt Trajan, the general of the Rhine frontier, had carried through a revolution. Thenceforward, just as every corporal of Napoleon's Grand Army carried a marshal's baton in his knapsack, so every army chief was felt at Rome to be a potential candidate for the imperial crown, the attainment of which was the ultimate promotion accorded to the greatest Roman warrior.
We need, therefore, feel no surprise that at the time when this new idea of merit and advancement came to be applied to the imperial dignity it should circulate through the whole body of the empire to quicken and rejuvenate, Intercommunication was established on every side between nations and classes, bringing fresh air among them, drawing them together, fusing them. In proportion as the ius gentium, that is to say, the law applying to foreign nations, modelled itself more and more on the ius civile or law of the Roman citizen, and at the same time as philosophy taught the ius civile to take heed of the ius naturale (natural law), the distance between Roman and foreigner, between the citizen and the peregrini, was lessened. Whether by personal favour, by emancipation, or by mass naturalisations extended at one stroke either to a class of demobilised auxiliaries or to a municipality suddenly converted into an honorary colony, a new flood of peregrini acquired citizenship. Never had the cosmopolitan character of the Urbs been so distinctly marked. The Roman proper was submerged on every social plane, not only by the influx of Italian immigrants but by the multitude of provincials bringing with them froom every corner of the universe their speech, their manners, their customs, and their superstitions.
Juvenal inveighs against this mud-laden torrent pouring from the Orontes into the Tiber. But the Syrians, whom he so greatly despised, hastened at the first possible moment to assume the guise of Roman civilians; even those who most loudly advertised their xenophobia were themselves more or less newcomvers to Rome, seeking to defend their adopted home againts fresh incursions. Juvenal himself was probaly born at Aquinum. In his house in "Pear Street" on the Quirinal, Martial sighs for Bilbilis, his little home in Aragon. Pliny the Younger, whether at Rome or in his Laurentine villa or on his estates in Tuscany, remains faithful to his Cisalpine birthplace; distant Como, which his liberality embellished, was never absent from his heart.
In the Senate House senators from Gaul, from Spain, from Africa, from Asia, sat side by sude; the Roman emperors, Roman citizens but newly naturalized, came from towns or villages beyond the mountains and the seas. Trajan and Hadrian were born in Spanish Italica in Baetica. Their successir, Antoninus Pius, sprang from bourgeois stock in Nemausus (modern Nimes) in Gallia Narbonensis; and the end of the second century was to see the empire divided between Caesar Clodius Albinus of Hadrumetum (Tunis) and Septimius Severus of Leptis Magna (Tripoli). The biography of Septimius Severus records that even after he had ascended the throne he never succeeded in ridding his speech of the Semitic accent which he had inherited from his Punic ancestors. Thus Rome of the Antonines was a meeting place where Romans of Rome encountered those inferior peoples against whom their laws seemed to have erected solid ethnic barriers, or---to be more accurate--- Rome was a melting pot in which, despite her laws, the perople were continually being subjected to new processes of assimilation. It was, if you will, a Babel, but a Babel where, for better or for worse, all comers learned to speak and think in Latin.
2: Slavery and Manumission
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 05:45:20 am
Metal, the entire gospel of Mark is all about getting rid of the Romans. It's no coincidence that he has the centurion mock Jesus at the crucifixion when he says "This was the son of a god?"
Post by: Duuvian on August 10, 2011, 06:01:52 am
Everyone learned to speak and think in Latin, even the slaves, who in the second century raised their standard of living to the level of the ingenui. Legislation had grown more and more human and had progressively lightened their chains and favoured their emancipation. The practical good sense of the Romans, no less than the fundamental humanity instinctive in their peasant hearts, had always kept them from showing cruelty toward the servi. (duuvnote: lol) They had always treated their slaves with consideration, as Cato had treated his plow oxen; however far back we go in history we find the Romans spurring their slaves to effort by offering them pay and bonuses which accumulated to form a nest egg that as a rule served ultimately to buy their freedom. (duuvnote: that sounds sufficiently like social security to be scary, although I bet coins are harder to keep safe as a roman slave than modern times) With few exceptions, slavery in Rome was neither eternal nor, while it lasted, intolerable; but never had it been lighter or easier to escape from than under the Antonines.
From the first century of the republic it had been recognized that the slave had a soul of his own, and the free citizens had, in practice, permitted him to join them in the service of whatever cul he preferred. At Minturnae, for instance, as early ast 70 B.C., the sanctuary of Spes, the Goddess of Hope, had been served by as many slave magistri as by free and freed magistri put together. Later, as culture grew spiritually richer and the influence of philanthropic philosophies increased, slaves gathered in ever greater numbers round the altars of the gods. In the first century of our era epitaphs began openly to pay honour to the manes of dead slaves, and in the second century the mystic funeral collegia, such as that founded in Lanuvium in 133 under the double invocation of Diana and Antinous, brought ingenui, freedmen, and slaves together in brotherly communion. In this particular case the slaves engaged, if they later gained their freedom, to regale their fellow members with an amphora of wine on the day of their liberation. The laws naturally kept pace with the progress of ideas. At the beginning of the empire a certain Lex Petronia had forbidden a master deliver his slave to the beasts of the amphitheatre without a judgement authorising him to do so. Toward the middle of the first century an edict of Claudius decreed that sick or infirm slaves whom their master had abandoned should be manumitted; and a short time afterwards an edict possibly drawn up by Nero under the inspiration of Seneca, who had vigorously championed the human rights of the slave, charged the praefectus urbi to receive and investigate complaints laid before him by slaves concerning the injustice of their masters. In 83 under Domitian a senatus-consultum forbade a master to castrate his slaves, and fixed as the penalty for infringement of this decreee the confiscation of half the offender's property. In the second century Hadrian had to double the penalty for this offence, which he declared a "capital crime," and he dictated to the Senate two decrees inspired by the same humanity: the first prevented masters from selling their slaves to either the leno or the lanista; that is, either to the procurer or the trainer of glaidators; the second compelled a master who had condemned his slave to death to submit the sentence for the approval of a praefectus vigilum before carrying it into execution. This humanitarian evolution culminated in the middle of the century when Antoninus Pius condemned as homicide any slaying of a slave by the sole order of his master.
Altogether, at this time Roman legislation reflects rather than imposes the humanitarian attitude which manners and customs had adopted. Juvenal castigates with the lash of his satire the miser who "pinches the bellies of his slaves"; the gambler who throws away a fortune on the throw of the dice and "Has no shir to give a shivering slave"; the coquette who loses her temper, storms and takes out her ill humour on the unoffending backs of her maids. The poets indignation is but the echo of public opinion, which abhorred no less than he the abominable cruelties of that Rutilus whom Juvenal withered with his scorn. In his day most masters, if they did not entirely abstain from corporal punishment of their slaves, at most visited their faults with rods such as Martial, without compunction, laid on his cook for a spoiled dinner. This did not prevent the master from caring for his slave and loving him even to the point of weeping for his death.
In the great houses where many of the slaves were able specialists and some, like the tutor, the doctor, and the reader, and enjoyed a liberal education, they were treated exactly like free men. Pliny the Younger desires his cousin Paternus to choose slaves for him in the market with discernment. He watches with anxiety over their health, going so far as to shoulder the expense of long and costly trips to Egypt or to Frejus in the Provencal plain. He allows them to make wills, though the property must remain within the household, and honors them as if legally binding. He relied with confidence more on their devotion than on his severity to stimulate their zeal when some relation turned up in his house, sure that they would endeavour to please their master by their attentions to his guest. The same kindly attitude prevailed among Pliny's friends; they felt their slaves to be almost part of the family. When the old senator, Corellius Rufus, was ill in bed, he liked to have his favorite slaves with him in the room, and when he had to send them out in order to talk privately, his wife withdrew with them. Pliny the Younger went even further, and did not disdain to discuss important matters with his slaves; when he was in thecountry he would invite the better educated among them to join with him in those learned discussions which at evening brighted his after dinner walks.
The slaves on their side were full of consideration for masters such as these. Pliny the Younger was stupefied by the news of the attack made on the senator Larcius Macedo by a party of his household slaves. His amazement is an index of the rarity of such a crime. And the care--- unfortunately useless--- lavished on the victim by those of his slaves who had remained faithful proves tgat even in houses where they were the mose severely handled, slaves could feel that their masters treated them like men. Indeed, a Greek who lived at Rome in the middle of the second century was struck by the leveling which had taken place between slaves and freemen, which to his amazement extended even to their clothes. Appian of Alexandria, writing under Antoninus Pius, remarks that even in externals the save is in no way distinguished from his master, and unless his master donned the toga praetexta of the magistrate, the two were dressed alike. Appian supplements this by recording a thing which astonished him even more: after a slave had regained his liberty he lived on terms of absolute equality with the Roman citizen.
Rome, alone of all cities of antiquity, has the honour of having redeemed her outcasts by opening her doors to them. It is true that the freed slave remained bound to his former master, now his patronus, sometimes by services due or by pecuniary indebtedness. and always by the duties implied by an almost filial respect (obsequium). But once his emancipation or manumissio had been duly pronounced, whether by a fictitious statement of claim before the praetor (per vindictam) or by the inscription of his name one the censor's register (censu) at the solemn sacrifice of the lustrum, or more commonly in virtue of a testamentary clause (testamento), the slave obtained by the grace of his master, living or dead, the name and status of a Roman citizen. His descendants of the third generation were entitled to exercise the full political rights of citizenship and nothing further distinguished them from ingenui. In the course of time the formalities of manumission were relaxed, and custom, superceding law, substituted simpler and spedier methods of procedure for the manumission rites: a mere letter from the patron or a verbal declaration made, for instance, in the course of some festivity where the guests were requested to serve as witnesses. The caprice of fashion began to take a hand, and it seemed as if some masters took a pride in multiplying the number of manumitted slaves round them. This practice became so fashionable that Augustus, alarmed by such prodigality, made efforts to set some limit to it's indulgence. He fixed eighteen as the minimum age at which a master could exercise the right to free a slave, and thirty as the minimum age at which a slave could be manumitted. As regarded testamentary manumission, which was by far the most frequent form of legal emancipation, he laid down the rule that according to circumstances the number of slaves set free should bear a certain ratio to the total number of slaves possessed by the deceased master, and should not in any case exceed a maximum of a hundred.
He devised an inferior category of semicitizens, who were known as Latini Iuniani, to whom was granted the partial naturalization of the Ius Latii, which, however, debarred the holder from making or benefitting from a will. All slaves whom their masters had manumitted in violation of the imperial decress or in any irregular fashion outside the formal legal procedure were flung pell-mell into the category of Latini Iuniani. But custon was stronger than the emperor's will and nullified his legislation. In an effort to counteract the falling birth rate, he released all Latini Iuniani who were fathers of families from the inferiority of second class citizenship to which he had himself condemned them. Then Tiberius granted the same relaxation to former vigiles in order to stimulate enrolment in his cohorts; later , Claudius extended full rights to liberti of both sexes who employed their capital outfitting merchant ships, Nero to those who invested it in building, and Trajan to those who used their money to set up bakeries.
Ultimately all the emperors, out of love for their own freed slaves or those of their friends, took pains to obliderate the last trace of their servile origin, either by utilising the legal fiction of the natalium restitutio or by slipping onto their finger the gold ring which might open the way to the equestrian status. Hence in the period we are studying, the slaves who benefited by the ever-increasing numbers of manumissions were placed on a footing of complete equality with other Roman citizens, enabled to secure positions and fortunes and to purchase droves of slaves in their turn, as we see Trimalchio doing.
An epigraphist walking through the ruins of ancient Rome receives the impression that slaves and freedmen predominated in the life of the imperial epoch, for three out of four they alone are mentioned in the inscriptions which are still to be read on the walls. In an article remarkable for the quantity and accuracy of it's statistics, Tenney Frank points out that since in the majority of cases the form of a slave name betrays its owner's Graeco-oriental origin, iti is easily proved that at least 80 per cent of the population of Imperial Rome had been emanicpated from more or less ancient servitude. At first sight the observer is filled with admiration for the strength which this constant rise seems to imply, both in a society which can unceasingly assimilate new elements and in an empire which can extend to the farthese horizon the area from which it draws new elements; and he is tempted to attribute to the Rome of the Antonines the free play and the deserved advantages of a perfect democracy.
3: THE CONFUSION OF SOCIAL VALUES (aka the less wonderful aspects of Roman slavery)
Post by: Duuvian on August 10, 2011, 07:52:40 am
Post by: Dsarker on August 10, 2011, 08:07:19 am
Post by: Ochita on August 11, 2011, 03:37:03 am
Life: 6.3
Mind: 7.2
Body: 8.4
Spirit: 4.5
Friends/family: 4.7
Love: 0.8
Finance: 4.2
Hmmm.. A high body and mind, yet little spirit..
Post by: Tarran on August 11, 2011, 04:52:17 am
Hmmm.. A high body and mind, yet little spirit..And you were supposed to be our Messiah.
Post by: Ochita on August 11, 2011, 05:08:54 am
The mind is a part of the spirit, and with low mind, the spirit is all but inert.
My mind brings even my low spirit, and it enhances it. Plus mind powers.
Post by: optimumtact on August 11, 2011, 06:09:21 am
Mind:7.5
Body:7.6
Spirit:6.5
Friends/Family:5.9
Love:1.5
Finance:6.5
Yay for living in New Zealand, but I seem to be missing a critical element!
Post by: Cecilff2 on August 11, 2011, 04:35:18 pm
Mind: 7.5
Body: 6.5
Spirit: 10
Friends/Family: 4.4
Love: 2.3
Finance: 8.1
MY DRILL IS THE DRILL THAT WILL PIERCE THE HEAVENS
Post by: Tarran on August 11, 2011, 05:27:09 pm
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 11, 2011, 05:44:13 pm
Hot damn, Cecilff2 is now the Messiah.With that avatar? Hardcore.
Post by: Nivim on August 13, 2011, 01:17:04 am
I'll do this one tomorrow, actually, if people wish to read it.I have been reading it and wish to continue, but considering that it is a full-length book and you're posting it in the random self-test thread, I think it might be a better idea to find some suitable public host, then put the link to it here. I would recommend wikisource, but I researched the book in question using one of the links here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/0300000316) and discovered that it's not in public domain.
Post by: SolarShado on August 14, 2011, 02:42:09 am
Mind: 5.8
Body: 5.5
Spirit: 4.5
Friends/Family: 2.9
Love: 5.4
Finance: 4.2
Ho-hum...
Post by: Tellemurius on August 15, 2011, 01:24:44 am
Life: 6.2
Mind: 5.6
Body: 4.3
Spirit: 7.5
Friends/Family: 4.7
Love: 6.9
Finance: 6.9
ironically i had best test scores in school but shitty grades.
Post by: Cecilff2 on August 15, 2011, 09:38:03 am
Hot damn, Cecilff2 is now the Messiah.(http://swansong.determinismsucks.net/princess2.png)
You know I have earth's best interests at heart too. This place needs more giant red hands on tentacles.
Post by: Ochita on August 15, 2011, 09:41:55 am
Post by: Cecilff2 on August 15, 2011, 10:00:30 am
As the messiah of good I will have to stop you.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on August 15, 2011, 10:02:11 am
Post by: Cecilff2 on August 15, 2011, 10:16:15 am
Holy shit that's awesome. Where'd you find that?Did a quick image search for eversion princess.
http://forum.starmen.net/forum/Fan/Forum/48754/page/34#post1273563
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 15, 2011, 11:09:19 am
Post by: Darvi on August 15, 2011, 11:10:45 am
Post by: Criptfeind on August 15, 2011, 03:11:32 pm
Mind: 2.1
Body: 3.7
Spirit: 4.1
Friends/Family: 2.3
Love: 0
Finance: 3.2
Post by: Grimshot on August 19, 2011, 10:00:40 pm
Here is my results.
Your Aspie score: 119 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 93 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 19, 2011, 10:49:58 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 98 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 19, 2011, 11:05:12 pm
Spoiler: Last Poll (click to show/hide)
Your Aspie score: 96 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 110 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler: I'm all over the place. (click to show/hide)
Post by: Taricus on August 19, 2011, 11:08:46 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 78 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cthulhu on August 19, 2011, 11:29:41 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 154 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Word
Post by: Criptfeind on August 19, 2011, 11:30:48 pm
I did not get a chart.
Post by: Dr.Feelgood on August 19, 2011, 11:31:18 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 167 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ricky on August 19, 2011, 11:36:38 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 120 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
E: spoilers :/
Post by: MaximumZero on August 19, 2011, 11:45:50 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 111 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TherosPherae on August 19, 2011, 11:49:49 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 68 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Didn't really see that coming. Although many of the questions could be because of genetically inherited stuff, like hypersensitive hearing.
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 12:08:50 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 14 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yay. This just in: unsurprising information.
Post by: KaelGotDwarves on August 20, 2011, 12:27:08 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 147 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 12:28:03 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 140 of 200
You are very likely neurotypica
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So after being diagnosed with aspergers at an early age by a guy thought to be an expert in the subject, I maintain that he was a douchebag and I am some what mundane.
It is because he wrote he many books to do with the relation between aspergers and physical clumsiness, but I'm blind in one eye and he mustn't have take that into account.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2011, 12:42:40 am
Quote
Do you enjoy walking on your toes?Erg, this questions makes me cringe. I can't watch ballerinas on the off chance they walk on their toes, its just so unpleasant. Do people actually DO this?
Your Aspie score: 88 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 116 of 200
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=45&p2=76&p3=36&p4=72&p5=71&p6=24&p7=37&p8=40&p9=33&p10=38&p11=22&p12=36)
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 12:47:14 am
Erg, this questions makes me cringe. I can't watch ballerinas on the off chance they walk on their toes, its just so unpleasant. Do people actually DO this?Not on the tips of my toes, but on the balls of my feet, commonly refered to as walking on your toes, yes.
Also, ballerinas have point shoes so that they can stand on the tips of their toes. Trying it without these will end badly, as your toes just can not support your weight.
Post by: Dsarker on August 20, 2011, 12:49:43 am
Your Aspie score: 116 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 77 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2011, 12:51:36 am
Quote
Not on the tips of my toes, but on the balls of my feet, commonly refered to as walking on your toes, yes.If they meant balls of your feet, why didn't they say that? Bluh. Calling that walking on your toes doesn't even make any sense (and would have changed that answer from a 0 to a 2, I walk on the balls of my feet most of the time)
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 12:56:09 am
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 12:56:49 am
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 12:59:23 am
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2011, 01:02:13 am
Because man, I got both those so hard. (Though the urge for random-inappropriate-in-public-jumping-and-climbing-to-relieve-stress-and/or-just-because-those-objects-were-asking-for-it has definitely toned down a lot after several run-ins with security and how much it embarrasses the girlfriend...)
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 01:08:06 am
The urge to jump over things means that humanity hasn't yet crushed your child like soul.
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 01:12:02 am
I like forms.
Post by: Grimshot on August 20, 2011, 01:15:03 am
Post by: TherosPherae on August 20, 2011, 01:15:51 am
*shrug*How? What is there to like about forms?
I like forms.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2011, 01:18:24 am
Something about the way the information is structured just fucks with my mind.
Its not that I hate them, I don't, thinking about them they don't seem all that bad, really, I don't really understand what happens when I try to fill them out.
Heh, I may have some issues.
Post by: Bauglir on August 20, 2011, 01:19:59 am
Anyway, having never investigated this direction before, this information was deeply interesting, very enlightening, and will have absolutely no effect on how I act because I'm not actually placing much stock in using an Internet quiz to examine my psyche and you may have guessed that the first two descriptors were not entirely truthful :p. Also, the numerical results don't look significant at first glance and I wonder if the graph is blowing things out of proportion.
Your Aspie score: 127 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 78 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
EDIT: That's not to say it isn't an entertaining diversion, I just felt like turning that sentence extra-rambly.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 01:21:52 am
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 01:22:01 am
There are other forms that have made me want to strangle small wildlife, however.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 20, 2011, 01:25:30 am
Post by: Grimshot on August 20, 2011, 01:29:38 am
So in the context of this quiz, what does 'Hunting' mean?
This is just a copy and paste.
Aspie hunting
This group contains passive hunting traits. One part of the traits is related to preferred habitats (e.g. slowly flowing water; caves; woods; liking mist or fog). Another part seems to be
close-contact hunting traits (e.g. jumping over things; climbing; chasing animals; biting; enjoying spinning in circles; strong grip; strong hands; physical endurance; enjoying rodeo riders).
Some other traits are related to sneaking (e.g. sneaking through the woods; sneaking up on animals; walking on toes) and general hunting tactics (e.g. mimicking animal sounds; digging;
throwing small things; building traps; fascination for fire; sniffing)
Neurotypical hunting
The traits in this group are related to cooperative hunting. These traits are often described in terms of dysfunctions. Typical traits are recollections of environmental information (e.g.
positions of things; scores in games; order of words, letters and digits; map reading) and passing on information to others (e.g. passing on messages; knowing left from right; dates and times
of events; remembering appointments and events; reading clocks and calendars; carrying over information between contexts). Other traits are related to trading and exchange with others (e.g.
calculating change from a purchase; knowing what to bring to appointments; remembering sequences of past events; remembering formulas; filling out forms).
Post by: Bauglir on August 20, 2011, 01:31:12 am
Provided that I have all the information, it's like a very relaxing examination where I know all the answers and can just fill them in in a leisurely sort of fashion.
Exactly this. It's all just this nice long chain of, "Yeah, I got this, I'm being productive, everything's good..." Kind of like cooking something I've made dozens of times before, only stretched out over the time it takes to fill out the form. For me, anyway.
Post by: Heliman on August 20, 2011, 01:31:50 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 157 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 01:35:59 am
This is just a copy and paste.Hmm, I got a higher rating from Neurotypical, although some of the activities in aspie sound a lot more attractive. Sneeking around in a forest with a river sounds about a billion times more fun than filling out forms.
Aspie hunting
This group contains passive hunting traits. One part of the traits is related to preferred habitats (e.g. slowly flowing water; caves; woods; liking mist or fog). Another part seems to be
close-contact hunting traits (e.g. jumping over things; climbing; chasing animals; biting; enjoying spinning in circles; strong grip; strong hands; physical endurance; enjoying rodeo riders).
Some other traits are related to sneaking (e.g. sneaking through the woods; sneaking up on animals; walking on toes) and general hunting tactics (e.g. mimicking animal sounds; digging;
throwing small things; building traps; fascination for fire; sniffing)
Neurotypical hunting
The traits in this group are related to cooperative hunting. These traits are often described in terms of dysfunctions. Typical traits are recollections of environmental information (e.g.
positions of things; scores in games; order of words, letters and digits; map reading) and passing on information to others (e.g. passing on messages; knowing left from right; dates and times
of events; remembering appointments and events; reading clocks and calendars; carrying over information between contexts). Other traits are related to trading and exchange with others (e.g.
calculating change from a purchase; knowing what to bring to appointments; remembering sequences of past events; remembering formulas; filling out forms).
Having said that, I do love playing the DM. Right now I'm enjoying myself modding a mafia game, and that seems to fit into the neurotypical side.
I must just like hunting.
Post by: Lectorog on August 20, 2011, 02:09:39 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 58 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not really surprised here.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2011, 02:10:53 am
While the second seems to be more of a mixed bag, I'm amazingly bad at pretty much all the non-spacial/non-math bits, though. For example, me and months: I still have difficulty remembering their order, and forget how many days are in them, or what day it is, or whether today being the 24 and some event occurring on the 24th has any meaning to my poor little mind at all (it usually doesn't).
I guess ultimately that's not much to base things on, though.
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:12:55 am
Your Aspie score: 43 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 150 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:16:39 am
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:17:26 am
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 03:17:31 am
Quote
Do you have unusual sexual preferences?Shit. What do I reply there?
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:18:54 am
Well, now I'm intirgued. What's lanternstalk? Is it where I stalk you with a lantern?No, that would be spotlight, lanternstalk is the opposite. It is like 1-2-3-home, at night, the darker the better, with a lantern or torch as home. BEST GAME EVER.
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:20:52 am
Well, now I'm intirgued. What's lanternstalk? Is it where I stalk you with a lantern?No, that would be spotlight, lanternstalk is the opposite. It is like 1-2-3-home, at night, the darker the better, with a lantern or torch as home. BEST GAME EVER.
WHAT IN HELL IS 1-2-3-HOME? WHY DO YOU TAUNT ME WITH MY INDOORS CHILDHOOD? ;_;
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 03:22:07 am
QuoteDo you have unusual sexual preferences?Shit. What do I reply there?
Probably "yes," because absence of libido is associated with AS.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:25:15 am
WHAT IN HELL IS 1-2-3-HOME? WHY DO YOU TAUNT ME WITH MY INDOORS CHILDHOOD? ;_;
You, I, err, what? You don't know about 1-2-3-Home? Seriously, find some friends who enjoy this stuff and make up for lost time sometime. Soo much fun!
It is like hide and seek (You do know hide and seek, right?) but instead of just not being found, you need to get to a location (Almost always the location that the seeker counts from) without being found, and should 1-2-3-HOME!!!
As such, just sitting and waiting will not win it for you, you need to go out and get somewhere, but often the seeker will employ a trap tactic where as they just sit near home and wait for you, so normally either they need to tag you, so you can run for it when they spot you, and they can not go within a certain circumference after counting.
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:26:45 am
WHAT IN HELL IS 1-2-3-HOME? WHY DO YOU TAUNT ME WITH MY INDOORS CHILDHOOD? ;_;
You, I, err, what? You don't know about 1-2-3-Home? Seriously, find some friends who enjoy this stuff and make up for lost time sometime. Soo much fun!
It is like hide and seek (You do know hide and seek, right?) but instead of just not being found, you need to get to a location (Almost always the location that the seeker counts from) without being found, and should 1-2-3-HOME!!!
As such, just sitting and waiting will not win it for you, you need to go out and get somewhere, but often the seeker will employ a trap tactic where as they just sit near home and wait for you, so normally either they need to tag you, so you can run for it when they spot you, and they can not go within a certain circumference after counting.
Oh, you could have just said forty-forty.
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 03:26:51 am
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:27:50 am
Oh, you could have just said forty-forty.
Oh... over here, we shout "Olly olly oxenfree."
???
:P
Your both wrong.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 03:29:26 am
Quote
Do you have problems filling out forms?BWAHAHAHAHAAAA xD
OH THE IRONY.
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:30:34 am
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:31:20 am
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 03:34:48 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
WRONG!
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:35:32 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:36:31 am
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:39:16 am
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:40:10 am
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:42:42 am
Suck my wikipedia! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Rover)I would be taken aback if that game was what I had described.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:44:49 am
Yea, your right. That isn't it at all. It should be amended.
Post by: Blargityblarg on August 20, 2011, 03:46:16 am
It thinks Octopus is called 'British Bulldog'! It's similar, except British Bulldog needs you to bring the opponent to the ground by any means necessary!
Also we should probably stop shitting up MSH's thread with how right I am.
Post by: G-Flex on August 20, 2011, 03:47:01 am
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 03:48:11 am
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:50:01 am
Do people actually take this seriously?Ha, no, not really.
It is just a spot of fun. Any self done test can never be accurate, as people aren't answering for who they are, they are giving answers for some mix between who they think they are, and who they want to be, and neither are required to be anything like the real you. If you think you are an aspie, then see a professional, as there is a reason they train for years before they are qualified to diagnose.
And even then they suck...
Post by: G-Flex on August 20, 2011, 03:53:53 am
Any self done test can never be accurate, as people aren't answering for who they are, they are giving answers for some mix between who they think they are, and who they want to be, and neither are required to be anything like the real you.
The other issue being that there's no way you can automate a diagnosis like this, no matter who's writing the test or how perfect the subject is at taking it. But you know that.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 03:57:53 am
Post by: SolarShado on August 20, 2011, 04:02:58 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 119 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
A bit more even than I was expecting...
Post by: Heliman on August 20, 2011, 04:09:56 am
Aspie huntingSo, what you're saying is that people with aspies are natural hunters?
This group contains passive hunting traits. One part of the traits is related to preferred habitats (e.g. slowly flowing water; caves; woods; liking mist or fog). Another part seems to be
close-contact hunting traits (e.g. jumping over things; climbing; chasing animals; biting; enjoying spinning in circles; strong grip; strong hands; physical endurance; enjoying rodeo riders).
Some other traits are related to sneaking (e.g. sneaking through the woods; sneaking up on animals; walking on toes) and general hunting tactics (e.g. mimicking animal sounds; digging;
throwing small things; building traps; fascination for fire; sniffing)
Vector! If we're ever in the same city and if you ever stop being a vegetarian, remind me to show you how to murder up some venison.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 04:12:23 am
Post by: Heliman on August 20, 2011, 04:13:22 am
EDIT: unless he lives with his parents.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 04:14:23 am
Post by: Heliman on August 20, 2011, 04:18:27 am
Wait, fuck, what were we talking about again?
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 04:19:32 am
Post by: Solifuge on August 20, 2011, 04:20:28 am
Spoiler: First Trial (click to show/hide)
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 156 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler: Second Trial (click to show/hide)
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 123 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Aspie hunting
This group contains passive hunting traits. One part of the traits is related to preferred habitats (e.g. slowly flowing water; caves; woods; liking mist or fog). Another part seems to be
close-contact hunting traits (e.g. jumping over things; climbing; chasing animals; biting; enjoying spinning in circles; strong grip; strong hands; physical endurance; enjoying rodeo riders).
Some other traits are related to sneaking (e.g. sneaking through the woods; sneaking up on animals; walking on toes) and general hunting tactics (e.g. mimicking animal sounds; digging;
throwing small things; building traps; fascination for fire; sniffing)
That is really neat! I'd like to look more into the biological origins for Asperger's... sound's like it could be an adaptive trait, in certain circumstances!
Post by: Heliman on August 20, 2011, 04:22:24 am
The awesomeness of geeks, because smarts are sexy.That they are, Max. That they are.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 04:34:36 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hmm. I guess the different order in how the questions got asked might have something to do with the different result.
I think this one is more accurate too, since the one before had too many points in perception, which is why I redid the test.
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 04:43:08 am
That is really neat! I'd like to look more into the biological origins for Asperger's... sound's like it could be an adaptive trait, in certain circumstances!
I'd read the translation of Hans Asperger's 1943 paper, then. Apparently AS people were useful enough despite ailments that he argued against genocide.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 04:44:24 am
I'd read the translation of Hans Asperger's 1943 paper, then. Apparently AS people were useful enough despite ailments that he argued against genocide.So my life was justified by a guy who died before I was born? Feels soo much better...
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 04:50:21 am
So my life was justified by a guy who died before I was born? Feels soo much better...
Hehehe, well... yeah, I don't have much to say to that. But if you're useful to Nazi Germany, presumably you're useful to any culture =/
Wait... Hitler. May need to rethink that.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 04:52:50 am
Post by: Cheese on August 20, 2011, 05:23:07 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I think I answered 2 to too many questions.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 05:27:03 am
Post by: Cheese on August 20, 2011, 05:30:40 am
Post by: Darkwind3 on August 20, 2011, 08:18:13 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 160 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=23&p2=41&p3=5&p4=22&p5=24&p6=17&p7=22&p8=10&p9=8&p10=13&p11=14&p12=25)
Well, I guess that's a pretty low Aspie score for Bay12, judging by the poll.
Post by: AntiAntiMatter on August 20, 2011, 08:51:44 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 155 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2011, 10:13:27 am
Post by: Diablous on August 20, 2011, 10:35:58 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 107 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 10:37:23 am
Post by: Pnx on August 20, 2011, 10:59:35 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 98 of 200
This feels very shaky to me, sometimes the answer was "well yes and no," other times it might be "oh god yes."
In retrospect there's also a few questions I should have answered differently. Like the whole mimicking animal sounds thing. In retrospect I do try to mimic my cats and dogs. And I find it interesting how it's fairly easy to do a decent meow, but barks are very difficult.
Post by: TherosPherae on August 20, 2011, 11:14:48 am
Provided that I have all the information, it's like a very relaxing examination where I know all the answers and can just fill them in in a leisurely sort of fashion.Huh. Never thought of it like that. For me, forms are like "oh god why am I doing this pointless crap when I could be having fun or actually contributing to something. ARGHLADGKJABL" So I usually feel like strangling small, adorable wildlife afterwards because of it.
There are other forms that have made me want to strangle small wildlife, however.
Sadly, all the small, adorable wildlife in my area is too damn fast for me to catch and strangle.
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 02:15:26 pm
a. gets me something I want
b. I am guaranteed to pass
Post by: Solifuge on August 20, 2011, 02:23:57 pm
I enjoy test-taking... there's something reassuring about it for me. I can check my knowledge or opinions against something, and prove to myself that I know more than I used to. I like to turn a question over in my head for a while, to make sure I'm answering it truthfully and accurately, which can cause stress with a time-limit, though.
Tests like these are nice, since I can compare my current opinion of myself against the test's opinion of me, and maybe learn a few things.
EDIT:
I'd read the translation of Hans Asperger's 1943 paper, then. Apparently AS people were useful enough despite ailments that he argued against genocide.I'm trying to find a translated version of the paper, but having no luck save for some translation/excerpts in books. I might need to have Sluggo translate parts of it for me. That, or buckle down and get back to learning languages.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 02:25:54 pm
Heheh :D
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 02:32:31 pm
I'm trying to find a translated version of the paper, but having no luck save for some translation/excerpts in books. I might need to have Sluggo translate parts of it for me. That, or buckle down and get back to learning languages.
I'm sure you could find the official Uta Frith translation somewhere.
Here she is doing retrospective commentary, anyway (http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=HoRX8s8V8WYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=asperger+1944+Uta+Frith&ots=tlZIXSBuWu&sig=IkbT5Q1_lcKXHdZ-95_3OBvPeRk#v=onepage&q=asperger%201944%20Uta%20Frith&f=false).
EDIT: If you have access to an academic library, they are fairly likely to have at least one copy of this book.
Post by: Lysabild on August 20, 2011, 02:34:54 pm
That, or buckle down and get back to learning languages.
This is always recommended.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on August 20, 2011, 02:35:19 pm
Post by: Solifuge on August 20, 2011, 02:36:03 pm
I'm trying to find a translated version of the paper, but having no luck save for some translation/excerpts in books. I might need to have Sluggo translate parts of it for me. That, or buckle down and get back to learning languages.
I'm sure you could find the official Uta Frith translation somewhere.
Here she is doing retrospective commentary, anyway (http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=HoRX8s8V8WYC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=asperger+1944+Uta+Frith&ots=tlZIXSBuWu&sig=IkbT5Q1_lcKXHdZ-95_3OBvPeRk#v=onepage&q=asperger%201944%20Uta%20Frith&f=false).
EDIT: If you have access to an academic library, they are fairly likely to have at least one copy of this book.
...and that would be the book I found, with paraphrasal/excerpts. :P
Didn't think to check for her as an official translator for the original, though. I'll poke around and see!
EDIT: I'm currently not able to access our online paper database unless enrolled for a semester, but I can certainly try to find that book at the student library.
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 02:39:54 pm
Post by: ChairmanPoo on August 20, 2011, 02:44:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Screw them, I'm popular and well liked.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 02:49:48 pm
It means that you somehow cannot function normally in social situations, or something. Dunno, forgot the main symptoms and definition of Aspergers.
Post by: ToonyMan on August 20, 2011, 03:22:55 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 134 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Now depression and the inability to connect with anybody around me...
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 20, 2011, 03:24:54 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 108 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler: I'm a potato :D (click to show/hide)
I've been a victim of bullying for far longer in my life than I would approve of. Meaning, even in my adult life, some people just love being an asshole towards me exclusively; and in the past, since elementary school, it did cause a few social problems in me; but at least nowadays, I have grown past it and got better, and no longer give a crap, or instead try to use their psychology against them. Return the venom back to what bit me. Oftentimes, it seems that regular people associate me as a pure aspie, despite the fact that I'm a highly functional one. Other times, I'm interpreted as a rude and rather crude regular person. Truth of the matter is that I just stopped caring about what people perceive me as anymore, and just act naturally. Oddly enough, my normal behavior is still looked upon as odd, even though I've seen stranger behaviors in other people, and even witnessed a few double-standards as well; of course, being too polite not to call them out on their speedy judgement.
EDIT:
Am I the only one that managed to somehow score both marks above 100 pts.?
EDIT EDIT:
Scratch that, I guess not. Found a couple.
Post by: Azkul on August 20, 2011, 04:01:45 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 16 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
oh lawd
Post by: Burnt Pies on August 20, 2011, 07:20:36 pm
Your Aspie score: 94 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 99 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Megaman on August 20, 2011, 07:47:22 pm
Your Aspie score: 28 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 160 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Wonderful, I'm normal. UNLIKE YOU FREAKS
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 07:56:30 pm
Wonderful, I'm normal. UNLIKE YOU FREAKS
I'm awed by your decorum.
Post by: Max White on August 20, 2011, 08:00:49 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on August 20, 2011, 08:01:32 pm
Post by: Megaman on August 20, 2011, 08:28:03 pm
Post by: Vector on August 20, 2011, 08:35:46 pm
I'm just laughing at the irony that it was that sort of slightly offensive joke that a lot of aspies are typical of.
Oh, so this was the intended humor?
Heehee.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2011, 08:37:08 pm
Pff, Megaman didn't even make it to all 200 points. I'm over 200, punk! :P"Vegeta, what does the scouter say about his aspie level?"
"It's OVER NINE-"
*shot*
Post by: ToonyMan on August 20, 2011, 08:37:41 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on August 20, 2011, 08:38:29 pm
Post by: Megaman on August 20, 2011, 08:39:00 pm
So, now we have to be all about screaming ourselves hoarse, glowing in a threatening manner and internal monologuing for six episodes before anything actually happens?Rather.
It appears we have phased into the universe of a reality TV show. A bad(for a reality TV show) reality TV show.
Post by: Aqizzar on August 20, 2011, 09:21:03 pm
Spoiler: Intjeresting stuff.
(click to show/hide)
(click to show/hide)
I have to say, that was an odd questionnaire. I appreciate that they had a "Don't Know" answer, but then I start second-guessing what that counts for. And some of the questions are repeats with different wording, which I guess is a consistency factor. Doesn't really tell me much.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on August 20, 2011, 09:35:33 pm
Edit: though no less pointless.
Post by: Simmura McCrea on August 21, 2011, 06:00:05 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 114 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=34&p2=60&p3=20&p4=73&p5=29&p6=55&p7=22&p8=39&p9=11&p10=27&p11=8&p12=71)
I'm... normal? Ish? I think?
Post by: ChairmanPoo on August 21, 2011, 09:06:39 am
Post by: Darvi on August 21, 2011, 09:10:14 am
Sim, for instance, has low compulsivity and perception, but highly neurotypical communication and hunting behavior.
Post by: darkrider2 on August 21, 2011, 10:00:07 am
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 68 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Virex on August 21, 2011, 10:01:05 am
Yeah, they check for consistency. Someone didn't get a graph because his answers were to inconsistent.Spoiler: Intjeresting stuff.
(click to show/hide)
I have to say, that was an odd questionnaire. I appreciate that they had a "Don't Know" answer, but then I start second-guessing what that counts for. And some of the questions are repeats with different wording, which I guess is a consistency factor. Doesn't really tell me much.
Post by: Simmura McCrea on August 21, 2011, 10:01:50 am
Post by: Darvi on August 21, 2011, 10:05:15 am
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 21, 2011, 10:51:58 am
Quote
Aspie hunting
This group contains passive hunting traits. One part of the traits is related to preferred habitats (e.g. slowly flowing water; caves; woods; liking mist or fog). Another part seems to be
close-contact hunting traits (e.g. jumping over things; climbing; chasing animals; biting; enjoying spinning in circles; strong grip; strong hands; physical endurance; enjoying rodeo riders).
Some other traits are related to sneaking (e.g. sneaking through the woods; sneaking up on animals; walking on toes) and general hunting tactics (e.g. mimicking animal sounds; digging;
throwing small things; building traps; fascination for fire; sniffing)
Diagnostic relation
None.
Quote
Neurotypical hunting
The traits in this group are related to cooperative hunting. These traits are often described in terms of dysfunctions. Typical traits are recollections of environmental information (e.g.
positions of things; scores in games; order of words, letters and digits; map reading) and passing on information to others (e.g. passing on messages; knowing left from right; dates and times
of events; remembering appointments and events; reading clocks and calendars; carrying over information between contexts). Other traits are related to trading and exchange with others (e.g.
calculating change from a purchase; knowing what to bring to appointments; remembering sequences of past events; remembering formulas; filling out forms).
Diagnostic relation
A low score is related to Dyslexia and Dyscalculia.
Having that guide, and figuring out the scores of others can give you much better insight. My glaring weakpoint, according to the potato, shows that I am less a socialite, and more of an oddball that prefers working alone. Also because I also don't trust people to get a process done right, or my methods would be questioned without hesitation. For most relevance, check out the "Things Bay12ers can no longer do in RPGs" thread, and just how many things I can list off the top of my head. Sad/Crazy Awesome thing, I would actually consider resorting to some of them in any campaign provided I can. Key example, sending a flock of chickens to take out dinosaurs (and it works). THE POWER OF EVOLUTION COMPELS YOU!!!
On a plus side, I will admit I'm crazy, but I embrace my craziness because I know how to use it to turn it into degrees of Crazy Awesome much of the time. But I also mostly do Crazy Awesome things to screw with peoples' heads. It's pretty fun, and makes life more fun as well.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on August 21, 2011, 12:19:58 pm
Post by: Vector on August 21, 2011, 12:45:41 pm
Case in point: according to this, I should be overwhelmed by autistic processes, but I'm not.
They also don't ask the correct forms of the questions. Pacing when stressed is typical of both sides. Pacing in little circles in a particular direction is the autistic stereotype.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 21, 2011, 12:51:47 pm
They also don't ask the correct forms of the questions. Pacing when stressed is typical of both sides. Pacing in little circles in a particular direction is the autistic stereotype.I do that so much. People complain that I'm making them nervous when I walk around the livingroom table for ten minutes.
Post by: RedKing on August 21, 2011, 12:52:33 pm
Yes, this test is almost completely BS.
Case in point: according to this, I should be overwhelmed by autistic processes, but I'm not.
They also don't ask the correct forms of the questions. Pacing when stressed is typical of both sides. Pacing in little circles in a particular direction is the autistic stereotype.
Oh dear. I used to wear a groove in the floor in the kitchen because I would pace in a counter-clockwise fashion around the kitchen table whenever I talked on the phone (in part because I hate talking on the phone). I've always kinda wondered if I was borderline autistic, or some variation of autism. I also have a thing where I virtually never look someone in the eyes when talking to them, unless they're close friends or family. I tend to look "past" them, or in an entirely different direction altogether. It takes serious will and concentration to force myself to make eye contact. I've heard that's also symptomatic of autism.
EDIT: I'll have to take that test thingy when I have the time.
Post by: Darvi on August 21, 2011, 12:54:00 pm
Pacing in little circles in a particular direction is the autistic stereotype.You mean like characters in animated cartoons and comics that walk around in circles until there's a doughnut-shaped hole in the floor?
Post by: Pnx on August 21, 2011, 12:57:44 pm
A note, Solifuge, and Toonyman used image hosting websites which meant I couldn't use the numbers in the image url (damn them for respecting the quiz's bandwidth!), so I didn't use their images. Chairmanpoo and Megaman had no images, but I used their score anyway, and Cheese didn't give a score.
Spoiler: The average (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: The median (click to show/hide)
So out of those of us that participated.
We score out as about 90% aspie
Talent, compulsive, and social lean towards aspie, whereas communication and hunting lean more towards neurotypical.
Perception is only slightly more neurotypical.
Which is actually more or less what I'd expect. Although I want to comment I think this is a pretty poor way to judge your aspie levels.
You can get a copy of the spreadsheet (in excel and open office format) here (http://www.mediafire.com/?qzsqo2ttdzd5z9d).
So what does compiling data say about me aspie-wise? :D
EDIT: so I mislabelled median as mean. Fixed!
Post by: Darvi on August 21, 2011, 01:00:58 pm
Post by: Vector on August 21, 2011, 01:01:42 pm
Post by: SolarShado on August 21, 2011, 01:04:35 pm
Post by: Vector on August 21, 2011, 01:05:48 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 21, 2011, 01:17:58 pm
Post by: RedKing on August 21, 2011, 01:20:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It kinda looks like a cockatoo facing left, if the radial origin is the eye. :D
Post by: Bauglir on August 21, 2011, 02:37:45 pm
It kinda looks like a cockatoo facing left, if the radial origin is the eye. :D
Alternatively... PUPPY
Post by: Azkul on August 21, 2011, 04:34:26 pm
It kinda looks like a cockatoo facing left, if the radial origin is the eye. :D
Alternatively... PUPPY
or a Rhinoceros
Post by: Pnx on August 21, 2011, 05:02:32 pm
Um... average == mean...Woops, I meant to label it median not mean. I always mix those terms up. Anyway, that is the median.
Post by: RedKing on August 22, 2011, 08:02:10 am
Or a Protoceratops.It kinda looks like a cockatoo facing left, if the radial origin is the eye. :D
Alternatively... PUPPY
or a Rhinoceros
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I feel like my "natural" state is actually even more Aspie than the results, because I've learned over the years how to cope in some social situations, even when I'm cringing inside the whole way. Plus, my social behavior is very context-dependent. For instance, the "Do you like to meet new people?" question:
Well, if you're talking about going by myself to a room full of strangers and having to introduce myself and get to know them, then NO. That is a special level of Hell reserved for me.
But if we're talking about a situation where it's me and several friends and one or two new people, then I can be quite extroverted because I feel "safe" and want to help the new person feel welcome. If I had been raised in a rough inner-city I'd totally have been in a gang, because even though I'm sort of a loner, I need that in-group membership to feel comfortable with any kind of social interactions.
Interestingly enough, my wife is the total opposite. She's a natural extrovert, and has no problem with conferences and whatnot where she's meeting lots of new people all at once. But when we have regular gatherings of friends and somebody brings a new person, she's all out of whack.
Post by: Cecilff2 on August 22, 2011, 02:42:51 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 107 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=78&p2=51&p3=39&p4=82&p5=73&p6=56&p7=43&p8=22&p9=46&p10=26&p11=60&p12=35)
Whee! I am unclear! I am a bird with a top hat!
Post by: Heron TSG on August 22, 2011, 03:43:31 pm
Your Aspie score: 89 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 118 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
I'm not actually sure how to read this chart. There seem to be two of every axis.
Post by: Cecilff2 on August 22, 2011, 04:22:20 pm
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=86&p2=31&p3=44&p4=68&p5=31&p6=57&p7=49&p8=43&p9=29&p10=17&p11=30&p12=14)
Your Aspie score: 89 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 118 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
I'm not actually sure how to read this chart. There seem to be two of every axis.
There is. From what I gathered. There's traits that appear neurotypical, and traits that appear aspie. For example, the way you perceive is very highly correlated to neurotypical perception, but not quite so much to typical aspie perception.
Post by: Heron TSG on August 22, 2011, 05:04:21 pm
Post by: SolarShado on August 22, 2011, 05:11:19 pm
Post by: Dsarker on August 23, 2011, 01:44:40 am
Post by: SalmonGod on August 27, 2011, 05:11:08 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 94 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=65&p2=76&p3=46&p4=67&p5=62&p6=53&p7=51&p8=62&p9=27&p10=38&p11=36&p12=15)
Edit:
The PDF looks like it contains the most interesting info. My more detailed scores:
Aspie Talent: 6.5/10 (Need contemplation time; Believe myself to have good pattern recognition)
Neurotypical Talent: 2.5/10 (Hate verbal instructions; Cannot take notes; Best learn by doing)
Aspie Compulsion: 4.6/10 (Hate interruptions; Always mentally prepare before doing)
Neurotypical Compulsion: 3.3/10
Aspie Social: 6.2/10 (Chaotic sleep patterns; Resent authority; Daydreamer; Trouble finishing projects)
Neurotypical Social: 4.7/10 (Regenerate after socializing; Seen as kind of distant; Prefer to do things alone; Hate being observed while working, unless invited)
Aspie Communication: 5.1/10 (Very fidgety; Sit in weird positions; Talk very softly and thoroughly plan responses)
Neurotypical Communication: 3.8/10 (Often misunderstood; Problems with timing in conversation; Other people's priorities/motivations make no sense to me; Tend to speak honestly and literally and expect others to do the same, which is why I'm often misunderstood because people try to read into stuff when there's nothing to read into :[)
Aspie Hunting: 2.7/10
Neurotypical Hunting: 6.2/10
Aspie Perception: 3.6/10 (Sensitive to light)
Neurotypical Perception: 8.5/10 (Lose track of time; Bad sense of direction)
Environment: 4.5/10 (Shut down when overstressed; Bullied)
Post by: Bauglir on August 27, 2011, 05:15:23 pm
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 27, 2011, 05:49:42 pm
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 43 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
(http://www.rdos.net/eng/poly12c.php?p1=76&p2=81&p3=78&p4=84&p5=87&p6=68&p7=85&p8=66&p9=85&p10=61&p11=71&p12=78)
Post by: Bauglir on August 27, 2011, 06:04:14 pm
Post by: The Merchant Of Menace on August 27, 2011, 06:12:40 pm
Post by: Darvi on August 27, 2011, 06:14:01 pm
*badum-tish*
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 27, 2011, 06:16:31 pm
Post by: Darkwind3 on August 27, 2011, 06:36:43 pm
Post by: Vector on August 27, 2011, 06:44:47 pm
You are an owl facing left. I can do this all day, but if people want me to stop then don't hesitate to ask (I'm not trying to be annoying so much as mildly amusing for an instant before you move on).
Wrong! Oyster!
Post by: Bauglir on August 27, 2011, 06:45:47 pm
Post by: dragonshardz on August 27, 2011, 06:55:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
- Moderately expressed extravert
- Moderately expressed intuitive personality
- Moderately expressed feeling personality
- Moderately expressed judging personality
Post by: aadeon on September 08, 2011, 02:04:21 am
ISFP
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dsarker on September 08, 2011, 04:34:26 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutchling on September 08, 2011, 11:50:38 am
INTJ
89% Introverted
25% Intuitive
100% Thinking
11% Judging
Post by: MaximumZero on September 08, 2011, 11:02:53 pm
Your Type is
INTJ
89% Introverted
25% Intuitive
100% Thinking
11% Judging
INTJ brofist.
Post by: Flying Dice on September 09, 2011, 12:50:44 am
Your Type is
INTJ
89% Introverted
25% Intuitive
100% Thinking
11% Judging
INTJ brofist.
I've always wondered: is a brofist some sort of code name for a sex act relating to a fist, an ass, and a pair of friend-ish men who are constantly shouting "NO HOMO"?
;D
Because
INTJ
Introverted - 56%
Intuitive - 62%
Thinking - 1%
Judging - 11%
Post by: Dutchling on September 09, 2011, 06:59:12 am
Your Type is
INTJ
89% Introverted
25% Intuitive
100% Thinking
11% Judging
INTJ brofist.
8)
Post by: _DivideByZero_ on September 09, 2011, 07:23:24 pm
100% Introverted
~60% Intuitive
12% Thinking
1% Judging
Post by: Orangebottle on September 09, 2011, 11:20:38 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
- distinctively expressed introvert
- moderately expressed sensing personality
- slightly expressed feeling personality
- slightly expressed perceiving personality
Post by: MaximumZero on September 11, 2011, 07:18:30 pm
INTJ :D
100% Introverted
~60% Intuitive
12% Thinking
1% Judging
INTJ and Zero-in-name brofist for you.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 14, 2013, 11:49:55 pm
THE GREAT THREAD OF POLLING DATA RISES FROM THE DEPTHS, GROANING AS THE WHEELS OF CONVERSATION BEGIN TO TURN ONCE MORE
So, today this exchange happened:
Sorry, but my cardinal sin is Wrath, not Pride.To boast that I am doing so at this very moment, and subtly challenge your masculine or femenine pride to attempt to match my feat before I depose you and become alpha forumer.Hey Bay12. I dare you to chew 25 pieces of gum at once.What's yer offer?!
And it reminded me of this thread. And then I found a relevant poll. So, here we go again!
But first, the long, long, long, long not-actually-awaited-at-all results of the last poll:
Spoiler: Last Poll's Results (click to show/hide)
Now, tell me your sins. (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/seven_deadly_sins.html) Also, I wouldn't bother with the code it gives you, because it doesn't work here.
Spoiler: My Results (click to show/hide)
(inb4 MSH why would you necro for this it is just the hellpoll again NO IT ISN'T.)
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 12:03:55 am
I AM THE SINBEATER
Post by: Pnx on April 15, 2013, 12:04:49 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
So sloth is my biggest sin? I'd argue against that but I'm not feeling up to it.
Post by: PanH on April 15, 2013, 12:09:04 am
So sloth is my biggest sin? I'd argue against that but I'm not feeling up to it.I see what you did here.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 12:11:00 am
Post by: Vector on April 15, 2013, 12:12:12 am
Gluttony: Very Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Very Low
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Very Low
Pride: Low
Well okay then.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 12:13:29 am
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 12:13:41 am
Greed: Very LowWelcome to the low-sin club.
Gluttony: Very Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Very Low
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Very Low
Pride: Low
Well okay then.
Yes, so far you and the resident eldritch abomination are the least bad people.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 12:18:04 am
Gluttony: Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Low
Envy: Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Low
Well... It is the 21st century. If you have to pick a sin, it is kind of the best one to have.
Post by: Blargityblarg on April 15, 2013, 12:21:13 am
Greed: Medium
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Low
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 12:21:50 am
Search Photos of Singles. Free.Only seeing a minor correlation...
Greed: Medium
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Low
Post by: Blargityblarg on April 15, 2013, 12:22:51 am
Post by: Bdthemag on April 15, 2013, 12:24:31 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Medium
Holy fuck, I'm the ultimate sloth. I mean sure, on the weekends my sleep schedule is reversed and I become practically nocturnal, and I hate doing work and never finish anything I start, or that I only clean my room once it gets unbearable to live in, or....
God damn, I'm a sinful person. I expect Pride to be more though, to be honest.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 12:25:02 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 12:26:05 am
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 15, 2013, 12:26:32 am
Gluttony: High
Wrath: High
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Very Low
Pride: Very High
Cue Nobleman's laughter.
Post by: Blargityblarg on April 15, 2013, 12:27:09 am
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 12:27:23 am
Just wait until MZ gets here, if the hellpoll was any indication he'll have Very High's all around.I'm not sure there is an accurate measurement of his wrath...
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 12:28:12 am
I must say, though, many of the questions aren't very applicable to me. I don't own a vehicle, and I try to take the bus if possible. Humph.This. Also, I don't even have any relationships going on, so that automatically disqualifies me from a whol list of potential sin.
Post by: penguinofhonor on April 15, 2013, 12:33:03 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
Mmm, sloth.
Post by: Patchouli on April 15, 2013, 12:45:04 am
Greed: LowGot exactly the same.
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
So sloth is my biggest sin? I'd argue against that but I'm not feeling up to it.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 12:45:50 am
Just imagine how you'd feel if you were in a relationship, then.I must say, though, many of the questions aren't very applicable to me. I don't own a vehicle, and I try to take the bus if possible. Humph.This. Also, I don't even have any relationships going on, so that automatically disqualifies me from a whol list of potential sin.
Post by: Aqizzar on April 15, 2013, 01:17:21 am
Quote
Greed: High
Gluttony: High
Wrath: Very High
Sloth: High
Envy: High
Lust: Medium
Pride: High
Can't say I'm overly surprised by any but the Gluttony one. I'd say my eating habits are more a biproduct of Sloth. Although I did have an extra portion of desert tonight, so maybe it's true.
All in all, I'm pretty sin-y though.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 01:31:19 am
...pretty much the same.Just imagine how you'd feel if you were in a relationship, then.I must say, though, many of the questions aren't very applicable to me. I don't own a vehicle, and I try to take the bus if possible. Humph.This. Also, I don't even have any relationships going on, so that automatically disqualifies me from a whol list of potential sin.
Post by: i2amroy on April 15, 2013, 01:39:56 am
Greed: High
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: High
Pride: Low
Not too different from what I expected really.
Post by: Burnt Pies on April 15, 2013, 01:40:17 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
Sounds about right. Gluttony isn't too much of a problem, as sloth overrides it frequently.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 01:41:48 am
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 01:42:12 am
Seriously, doing stuff is good...
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 01:42:33 am
How is sloth such a common trait?That's lust.
Seriously, doing stuff is good...
Post by: sjm9876 on April 15, 2013, 01:43:07 am
Gluttony: mid
Wrath: high
Sloth: high
Envy: mid
Lust: low
pride: very low
more sloth
Post by: PanH on April 15, 2013, 01:43:58 am
Good god, Bay 12 is just a pit of sloth.I guess people aren't very productive on the internet :P
Post by: Osmosis Jones on April 15, 2013, 01:47:42 am
Gluttony:Medium
Wrath:Very Low
Sloth:Medium
Envy:Very Low
Lust:Medium
Pride:Very Low
Honestly thought I'd score higher on sloth. That said, I'm pretty sure I don't have a single point in wrath... So woo?
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 01:48:41 am
That's lust.No, stuff is sloth.
Things are lust. If you are doing stuff with a girl, you are helping her move her sofa. If you are doing things with a girl, you are having a good day.
Post by: Scelly9 on April 15, 2013, 01:56:05 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: High
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Medium
Lust: High
Pride: High
Oh, my.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 01:57:50 am
Lust: HighOoh my. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nSKkwzwdW4)
Post by: Scelly9 on April 15, 2013, 01:59:18 am
Yep, I knew what that was going to be...Lust: HighOoh my. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nSKkwzwdW4)
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 02:00:47 am
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 02:03:48 am
You see, to my mind, that statement makes 'stuff' sound like inanimate objects and the inflicting of lustful acts onto them, while 'things' implies alive things.That's lust.No, stuff is sloth.
Things are lust. If you are doing stuff with a girl, you are helping her move her sofa. If you are doing things with a girl, you are having a good day.
My mind is horrible.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 02:05:29 am
My mind is horrible.Hmm, I wonder what clear signs could have been indicative of that?
Oh yea...
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 02:06:43 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 02:09:23 am
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 02:11:37 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 02:13:27 am
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 02:14:49 am
Post by: Solifuge on April 15, 2013, 02:27:27 am
Greed: Very Low
Gluttony: Very Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Low
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Low
I would have suspected much higher on Pride, and even Envy though. Do I still get into the low-sin club?
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 02:28:08 am
Post by: Solifuge on April 15, 2013, 02:30:03 am
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 02:31:43 am
Gluttony: Medium - Interestingly, despite this, I am very skinny. I have no idea why.
Wrath: Very Low - Although I may harbor discontent towards others, I keep it on lockdown. Though I do sometimes let it go a little by mistake, so I don't think this is perfectly accurate.
Sloth: Very High - Yes.
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Very Low
Pride: Medium - This might be due to me usually having very few things to be prideful about.
Fun unrelated unimportant fact: If this were put in CK2, this would give me stat bonuses of +5 -1 +0 -1 +0.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 02:36:39 am
Fun unrelated unimportant fact: If this were put in CK2, this would give me stat bonuses of +5 -1 +0 -1 +0.How would one go about appropriating this fact for any given data set?
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 02:43:41 am
The answer to that is one of the three: Start up CK2 with Ruler Designer and add your virtues or sins and add up their values, or find your virtues and sins somewhere within the hundreds of characters in game and add up the values, or read the raw game files and add up the values there.
For reference, I gave everything lower than medium an "opposite" virtue and everything above a sin. Medium didn't get a trait.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 02:46:05 am
Post by: Solifuge on April 15, 2013, 02:57:19 am
Spoiler: From the Wiki (click to show/hide)
I mean, come on guys, I didn't even know what Crusader Kings was. All I had were the letters CK2 to go off of, and I got this in like a minute. Truly this forum's Deadly Sin is Sloth.
(And mine most certainly isn't Pride. Or sarcasm.)
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 03:00:01 am
For the lazy, this is what the base CK2 game virtues and sins give IN STATS ONLY:
1: Chaste - (no stat changes) versus Lustful - (no stat changes).
2: Temperate - (+2 Stewardship) versus Gluttonous - (-2 Stewardship).
3: Charitable - (+3 Diplomacy) versus Greedy - (-1 Diplomacy).
4: Diligent - (+1 EVERYTHING) versus Slothful - (-1 EVERYTHING).
5: Kind - (-2 Intrigue, +2 Diplomacy) versus Envious - (+2 Intrigue, -1 Diplomacy).
6: Patient - (+1 to everything but Martial) versus Wroth (-1 Diplomacy, -1 Intrigue, +3 Martial).
7: Humble - (no stat changes) versus Proud - (no stat changes).
Pre Post edit: Dammit Solifuge, I went file diving for this!
Post by: Frumple on April 15, 2013, 03:02:27 am
Quote
Greed: Very Low
Gluttony: Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: High
Pride: Very Low
That's... actually pretty close to my standard self-assignation of the deadly sins via standard cultural bias. Most amusing thing about lust is that I'm closer to asexual than anything and that rating probably has more to do with my appreciation of illicit artwork and what doesn't bother me (I've got a definition for perversion and I stick to it. It just happens to be more permissive than the normal, horribly inconsistent and fuzzy, cultural definition of "anything I/many other local people don't particularly like".) than anything particularly active.
But sloth is pretty definitely my major one. I'd rather chill and/or read or something than run around like a chicken with my head cut off. My motto is: "If you're in a hurry, you're already late and there's no point rushing anymore."
Post by: Lysabild on April 15, 2013, 03:05:18 am
Gluttony: High
Wrath: Medium
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Medium
Lust: Very High
Pride: Medium
~
Post by: Solifuge on April 15, 2013, 03:14:41 am
Or just go here: http://crusaderkings-two.wikia.com/wiki/Traits-snip-Spoiler: From the Wiki (click to show/hide)
-snip-
Pre Post edit: Dammit Solifuge, I went file diving for this!
My other other Deadly Sin is being a Ninja.
...a Deadly Sinja.
(also apparently so is the Excessive Use Of Portmanteus)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on April 15, 2013, 03:52:43 am
Gluttony: High
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Low
How dare this poll slander my good name! I am obviously the most lustful and prideful zergling in all existance!
It just didn't ask the right questions, because it wishes to delibrately mess with my street cred.
Post by: Cheeetar on April 15, 2013, 03:53:28 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Medium
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 04:04:47 am
Well, most of us. Some of us will be going to other hells while some goody-goody two-shoes will go into heaven.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 04:11:07 am
Post by: Jelle on April 15, 2013, 05:05:48 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on April 15, 2013, 08:46:08 am
Just wait until MZ gets here, if the hellpoll was any indication he'll have Very High's all around.
Greed: High
Gluttony: High
Wrath: High
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: High
Pride: Medium
In your face! No Very High's at all! Oh, wait, that's still not very good, is it?
Post by: Wolfeyez on April 15, 2013, 09:08:16 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Medium
Lust: Medium (Yeah ok that is wrong)
Pride: Very Low
Post by: scriver on April 15, 2013, 09:13:45 am
Gluttony: Very Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Medium
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
Thought Sloth would be at least High, but it turned out Lust was my biggest sin. My lowest was Wrath, followed by Greed. At least that makes sense.
Also suck it Bay12 I'm a better person than most of you! *Pride immediately skyrockets*
...Oh dammit.
Post by: Diablous on April 15, 2013, 10:19:57 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Very Low
Highest is Sloth. Makes sense, I've known for a long time that I'm a lazy bastard.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 10:22:59 am
No envious or greedy Bay Watchers as of yet, either.
(Wrath is still the best sin, Wrath 2016!)
Post by: Wolfeyez on April 15, 2013, 10:28:25 am
Neurotypical/Aspie test
Your Aspie score: 56 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 173 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Level of hell test
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jervill on April 15, 2013, 10:32:00 am
Well guys, on the bright side, all this sloth means we get to suffer in hell together rather than separately. :P
Well, most of us. Some of us will be going to other hells while some goody-goody two-shoes will go into heaven.
Suffer in hell? Nay, I say we conquer hell together...once we get around to it.
Greed: Very Low
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Very Low
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 15, 2013, 10:38:57 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Very Low
Lust: High
Pride: Very Low
Hmm... I dunno. I don't feel that I'm actually particularly lustful? What seems to have done me in was that I have no moral problem with dating several people at once. Changing that answer brings it to low. Odd. I don't actually date more than one person at once most of the time, and it's been a while. Also, my gluttony is based on eating out, but let's be honest - despite gluttony being one of my greatest sin areas, eating out is an indicator of sloth, not gluttony! I much prefer eating at home and making my own food, but then I have to do DISHES and CARRY IT TO WORK and all that crap. Much easier to get someone else to make my lunch for me.
Summary: This test is very confused and inaccurate.
Post by: Shook on April 15, 2013, 10:55:10 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Low
I would've thought i was more angry than that (given how i actually have a hair-trigger temper, but they didn't list anything that would tick me off really badly), but apparently my anger is RIGHTEOUS JUSTICE ANGER and thus isn't sinful wrath. :U
I am, however, a lazy fuck, and it shows. Seems to be a common trait nowadays though, amirite bay12?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 11:01:58 am
I would've thought i was more angry than that (given how i actually have a hair-trigger temper, but they didn't list anything that would tick me off really badly), but apparently my anger is RIGHTEOUS JUSTICE ANGER and thus isn't sinful wrath. :UAs it just so happens... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteous_indignation)
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 11:03:56 am
In the inferno test.
Post by: Shook on April 15, 2013, 11:06:26 am
Huh, fancy that. So i CAN be super angry and not go to hell for it! Time to go perceive everything as an insult to my person/principles so i can relish in the joy of RIGHTEOUS BURNING RAGE and then even avoid damnation because of it!!I would've thought i was more angry than that (given how i actually have a hair-trigger temper, but they didn't list anything that would tick me off really badly), but apparently my anger is RIGHTEOUS JUSTICE ANGER and thus isn't sinful wrath. :UAs it just so happens... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Righteous_indignation)
Post by: Scelly9 on April 15, 2013, 11:08:42 am
Post by: Svarte Troner on April 15, 2013, 11:17:47 am
Gluttony: Low
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
89% Introvert
50% Intuitive
12% Feeling
44% Perceiving
I guess I'm a pretty mellow guy.
Post by: Digital Hellhound on April 15, 2013, 11:18:59 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Medium
Damn, here I was hoping I wouldn't end up Sloth like everyone else.
Post by: Leatra on April 15, 2013, 11:29:14 am
Greed: Low
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Medium
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Medium
Sloth runs high in this forum. I think it's because I checked the "sleeping past noon" because I end up sleeping for 4-5 hours when I'm going to school, which tends to leave me sleep depraved and it takes it's toll on weekends. But yeah, I avoid working as much as possible. "I'd like to date but lack the motivation to pursue it" was probably a big hit too because I really am that way. I hate texting and talking on the phone too much thanks to my ex-girlfriend who would wake me up to talk or something.
Post by: Zangi on April 15, 2013, 12:11:59 pm
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: Very Low
Yarr... Sloths away.
Post by: sjm9876 on April 15, 2013, 12:39:13 pm
Your Aspie score: 118 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 67 of 200
You are very likely an Aspie
No surprises here.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 15, 2013, 12:47:52 pm
Post by: kaijyuu on April 15, 2013, 12:51:32 pm
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: High
Pride: Medium
/me doesn't think he's very prideful, but the rest seem accurate.
I think I figured out the problem with the Sin test. It measures overall how okay you are with expressions of a given Sin, but doesn't actually measure how guilty you are of them.Au contraire, I feel its weakness is it sometimes DOES check how guilty you are of them. I haven't slept with more than one person in the past year, but had I the opportunity I certainly would have. There's a big factor in Lust that I miss out on that probably should apply to me.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 15, 2013, 01:04:59 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 01:09:28 pm
Post by: Doctus on April 15, 2013, 01:16:47 pm
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: High
Post by: kaijyuu on April 15, 2013, 01:22:09 pm
That would... still leave you guilty of lust. o_OIndeed. I feel I'm more guilty of it than the test implies.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 15, 2013, 01:33:14 pm
It [...] doesn't actually measure how guilty you are of them.
Au contraire, I feel its weakness is it sometimes DOES check how guilty you are of them.
Indeed. I feel I'm more guilty of it than the test implies.
/me is confused.
/me is very confused.
Post by: freeformschooler on April 15, 2013, 01:58:34 pm
Gluttony: Very Low
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Medium
Lust: Low
Pride: Medium
I'm not especially sinful. I expected to rank higher on Greed, given I'm a huge cheapskate except when it comes to my friends.
Post by: kaijyuu on April 15, 2013, 02:13:14 pm
Ah, the misunderstanding is on my part. I mixed up some words in your original post and was talking about something you weren't.It [...] doesn't actually measure how guilty you are of them.Au contraire, I feel its weakness is it sometimes DOES check how guilty you are of them.Indeed. I feel I'm more guilty of it than the test implies.
/me is confused.
/me is very confused.
Carry on~
Post by: Zangi on April 15, 2013, 02:39:39 pm
Greed: MediumWell, charity to friends is a redeeming factor I believe. So you are not as sinfully greedy as you figure.
Gluttony: Very Low
Wrath: Low
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Medium
Lust: Low
Pride: Medium
I'm not especially sinful. I expected to rank higher on Greed, given I'm a huge cheapskate except when it comes to my friends.
Post by: Jervill on April 15, 2013, 02:48:34 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
All things considered, the City of Dis sounds pretty pleasant. Rental costs are probably pretty low there compared to lower levels.
Post by: Svarte Troner on April 15, 2013, 03:15:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Your Aspie score: 41 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 144 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical
Is that a good thing?
Post by: sjm9876 on April 15, 2013, 03:18:13 pm
Post by: Lectorog on April 15, 2013, 03:43:17 pm
Gluttony: medium
Wrath: medium
Sloth: medium
Envy: very low
Lust: high
Pride: medium
The fuck. I'm nearly asexual. I guess this is because I don't judge others harshly enough.
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 03:54:03 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Welp, seems about right. Darn, so close to Limbo. Thanks god, I totally deserve being in a lower level of hell for not believing in you. Apparently, not believing in you is worse than hurting others.
Post by: Wrex on April 15, 2013, 04:11:23 pm
Gluttony: Low
Wrath: Very High
Sloth: Low
Envy: Low
Lust: Very Low
Pride: High
No surprises here.
Post by: Haspen on April 15, 2013, 04:25:54 pm
Quote
Greed: Medium
Gluttony: Low
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Medium
Lust: Medium
Pride: Medium
So apparently your Gluttony gets super low if you don't east fast foods? Hurr, this quiz sometimes...
Post by: ToonyMan on April 15, 2013, 04:42:11 pm
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Low
I wish it could tell me my blood-type!
Post by: misko27 on April 15, 2013, 05:20:11 pm
Gluttony:Low
Wrath:Medium
Sloth:Medium
Envy:High
Lust:Medium
Pride:High
This confirms my belief I am suited to politics. Although, I think the fact I'm poor negatively affected Greed a lot, and positively affected Pride. I don't give to charity, I take. Hard to be braggy when you are poor. Still, I kept expecting Pride to be higher.
Gluttony is surprisingly low on my chart, someone explain to me, how is that different from Greed and Sloth?
Post by: Wrex on April 15, 2013, 05:44:59 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 15, 2013, 05:53:43 pm
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 06:02:08 pm
One who is gluttonous may even enjoy sharing with friends, hosting the feast, so to speak, but one who is greedy does not share. Still, one who is greedy may want more and more, but never indulge in it, like wanting more pairs of shoes but never wearing most of them.
Post by: Zrk2 on April 15, 2013, 06:07:50 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 15, 2013, 06:08:51 pm
From what I can gather, Gluttony has to do with indulging in all things more than any man should. Greed is about obtaining, hoarding and keeping from others.Duly noted.
One who is gluttonous may even enjoy sharing with friends, hosting the feast, so to speak, but one who is greedy does not share. Still, one who is greedy may want more and more, but never indulge in it, like wanting more pairs of shoes but never wearing most of them.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 06:13:44 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 06:14:13 pm
Post by: Aqizzar on April 15, 2013, 06:16:45 pm
See, this is why Wrath is the best sin. No confusion on that one.
Word up to my Wrath homies. We keep our shit tight.
If my attitude during my daily commute is anything to go by, I might achieve a wrathful apotheosis before the end of my life.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 06:18:27 pm
Sloth is about more than getting up late, it is about indifference. Not really caring to attend ones duties. Not caring to feed the pets or do homework.
Lust isn't a sin and shouldn't be treated as one. Ladies.
Post by: Frumple on April 15, 2013, 06:23:13 pm
See, this is why Wrath is the best sin. No confusion on that one.Nnn... nah. At least gluttony and lust are kinda' enjoyable, and sloth can loose some stress here and there. Wrath just makes you and everyone around you feel like shit, same as envy and greed. Not really sure about pride. I think something broke in me a long time ago and I can't really feel it enough to know what it is. S'kinda' odd, honestly. I guess it might feel good? I can feel satisfaction in an act well performed, but that's more an aesthetic thing than anything personal.
And to preempt it, no, I've never had a single emotion related to anger that I can recall that felt anything even remotely approaching good. Anger just makes me tired, feel like shit, and roughly 95-99% of the time it's made the situation worse. Maybe even more often. Even righteous anger is usually a downer, because it probably means there's a problem I either can't fix or haven't figured out how to. What joy is found in futility?
... though I do kinda' like breaking things. S'no wrath involved, I just like seeing how things come apart. S'a very innocent feeling, really.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 06:26:22 pm
Post by: Leafsnail on April 15, 2013, 06:30:15 pm
Due to my own weakness, it all piles up on me.
At some future date, it shall all come crashing down.
Spoiler: Therefore I deny tomorrow (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 06:36:45 pm
Wrath just makes you and everyone around you feel like shit, same as envy and greed.That's where you're wrong. Wrath feels great. Greater than simply enduring in silence. To indulge in Wrath is to let the world know how you really feel, and to not give a fuck as to however it chooses to feel about that.
Too many people in the world are weak. Not just of body but of mind. They shuffle about never expressing their true desires, especially what makes them angry. We're taught from birth not to rock the boat, but if the boat is full of holes anyway, why be silent? You might even plug a hole or two telling those motherfuckers how they're letting you all sink, and if not at least you'll drown knowing you proved you were right.
And besides all of that, there's something about anger that is just....human. Animals might commit violence, and they might even approach a state you could call "angry", but there's not as much behind it. They might be angry, but they don't know why, not really. Being able to apply reason to anger and temper it into a force you can use, that is a uniquely human trait. And any pain you might suffer because of that anger just becomes more fuel for the fire. The rage and hate don't cloud my judgement, they only make it clearer. There is no greater drive.
You don't know enough about anger. What you're describing is annoyance. Anger feels good. Really, really good.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 06:45:48 pm
It really didn't work out.
Post by: Frumple on April 15, 2013, 06:48:35 pm
I know annoyance well. I feel it very, very often. Anger is a very different beast, and by the gods I've never liked it and it's never done anything good for me. Once or twice I've seen something vaguely good come from anger motivated action. Out of hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of examples that either went badly or went more (often much more) poorly than it could. Civility and purposeful action has done more and more consistently in my life than anger and shouting at people has even approached managing.
Though I guess that's why it's a sin instead of a virtue, hum.
Post by: misko27 on April 15, 2013, 07:17:51 pm
It should be noted, Wrath includes the sullen, and in hell you all get grouped together. Prepare to have a lot of arguments. Forever.
Meanwhile, Pride, Greed, Gluttony, and Envy will all form rival lobbying groups. And lust will be, very happy together. And Sloth simply won't care.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 07:20:07 pm
It should be noted, Wrath includes the sullen, and in hell you all get grouped together. Prepare to have a lot of arguments. Forever.I. Love. Arguing.
Do you really think I'd have 15,000 posts if I didn't?
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 07:20:16 pm
Group the lustful together, and you are going to have a fun time.
Post by: ToonyMan on April 15, 2013, 07:25:41 pm
Gluttony is actually more than food, but to differentiate Greed and Lust, Greed is a desire to possess, and lust is seeking out sexual release and coveting and longing and wanting and finally finishing. Both greed and lust are, in large part, about obtaining. while gluttony is all about giving in to life's little pleasures... to excess. It's indulgence. It's about consuming until no more can be consumed.I agree with this, a true glutton must consume every bit of entertainment.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 07:31:39 pm
I have almost 10,000 and I've almost never argued.It should be noted, Wrath includes the sullen, and in hell you all get grouped together. Prepare to have a lot of arguments. Forever.I. Love. Arguing.
Do you really think I'd have 15,000 posts if I didn't?
The real thing here is that all of these sins are okay, but in moderation. Excess is what kills.
Post by: misko27 on April 15, 2013, 07:37:02 pm
Envy will be a near anarchy based tibes
Greed will fairly better then Envy in terms of co-operation, working towards a common goal of getting more. Feudalism.
Gluttony will spend time eating, in vague confused city-states. Mostly focus on others as it relates to getting more to consume.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 07:39:43 pm
Post by: Vector on April 15, 2013, 09:22:59 pm
I think it was just a bad test.
Post by: Aqizzar on April 15, 2013, 09:31:13 pm
Group the wrathful together, and soon there will only be one left standing in a bloody mess.
Group the lustful together, and you are going to have a fun time.
That, or the wrathful will fight their way out of Hell. If one pissed off marine with a bazooka could do it, just imagine what an army of irate arguers could do. Hell hath no fury like... people furious at being stuck in Hell.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 09:32:28 pm
What about arguing about who gets to kill Satan?Group the wrathful together, and soon there will only be one left standing in a bloody mess.
Group the lustful together, and you are going to have a fun time.
That, or the wrathful will fight their way out of Hell. If one pissed off marine with a bazooka could do it, just imagine what an army of irate arguers could do. Hell hath no fury like... people furious at being stuck in Hell.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 09:33:15 pm
Explain.Group the wrathful together, and soon there will only be one left standing in a bloody mess.
Group the lustful together, and you are going to have a fun time.
That, or the wrathful will fight their way out of Hell. If one pissed off marine with a bazooka could do it, just imagine what an army of irate arguers could do. Hell hath no fury like... people furious at being stuck in Hell.
Post by: Aqizzar on April 15, 2013, 09:34:34 pm
What about arguing about who gets to kill Satan?Group the wrathful together, and soon there will only be one left standing in a bloody mess.
Group the lustful together, and you are going to have a fun time.
That, or the wrathful will fight their way out of Hell. If one pissed off marine with a bazooka could do it, just imagine what an army of irate arguers could do. Hell hath no fury like... people furious at being stuck in Hell.
Nah man, that's Pride. Which does kinda go hand in hand, but whatever, it'll work itself out in some suitably wrathful fashion. Probably with a lot of infighting.
Still be more productive than grouping the slothful together.
Post by: Lectorog on April 15, 2013, 09:35:27 pm
I'm kind of surprised I ranked so low on wrath and pride, honestly. Wrath, pride, and envy have been my bugaboos for, like, ever.Considering no-one so far has had envy or greed, I'm thinking the test is pretty damned skewed. I would definitely peg you for pride, no offense (more related to ambition, but not in as greedy a sense).
I think it was just a bad test.
What about arguing about who gets to kill Satan?Oh shit I love killing Satan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doom_%28video_game%29 ?That, or the wrathful will fight their way out of Hell. If one pissed off marine with a bazooka could do it, just imagine what an army of irate arguers could do. Hell hath no fury like... people furious at being stuck in Hell.Explain.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 09:38:03 pm
Post by: Vector on April 15, 2013, 09:40:22 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on April 15, 2013, 09:40:58 pm
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 09:42:33 pm
What if I want to stay in the Wrathful part of hell, though? I mean, imagine the fistfights I could have with the Minotaur!That'd get you shipped off to Pride.
Post by: Max White on April 15, 2013, 09:47:42 pm
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 09:49:33 pm
Or gluttony, depending on the outcome of the fight.No, I mean considering yourself awesome enough to fight a minotaur for no other reason than to fight it would get you shipped off to Pride.
The Circles of Hell are a real bitch that way.
Post by: mcclay on April 15, 2013, 10:01:57 pm
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 66px; background: #660033;"> </div></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 85px; border: none; padding: 7px; background-color: #331111;"><b style="color: #ffffff; font: bold 13px arial, 'sans serif';">Gluttony:</td><td style="background: #330011; width: 85px; border: none; font: normal 13px arial, 'sans serif'; padding: 7px; color: #ffffff;">Medium
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 92px; background: #660033;"> </div></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 85px; border: none; padding: 7px; background-color: #331111;"><b style="color: #ffffff; font: bold 13px arial, 'sans serif';">Wrath:</td><td style="background: #440011; width: 85px; border: none; font: normal 13px arial, 'sans serif'; padding: 7px; color: #ffffff;">High
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 124px; background: #770022;"> </div></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 85px; border: none; padding: 7px; background-color: #331111;"><b style="color: #ffffff; font: bold 13px arial, 'sans serif';">Sloth:</td><td style="background: #440011; width: 85px; border: none; font: normal 13px arial, 'sans serif'; padding: 7px; color: #ffffff;">High
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 116px; background: #770022;"> </div></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 85px; border: none; padding: 7px; background-color: #331111;"><b style="color: #ffffff; font: bold 13px arial, 'sans serif';">Envy:</td><td style="background: #110022; width: 85px; border: none; font: normal 13px arial, 'sans serif'; padding: 7px; color: #ffffff;">Very Low
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 16px; background: #110099;"> </div></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 85px; border: none; padding: 7px; background-color: #331111;"><b style="color: #ffffff; font: bold 13px arial, 'sans serif';">Lust:</td><td style="background: #330011; width: 85px; border: none; font: normal 13px arial, 'sans serif'; padding: 7px; color: #ffffff;">Medium
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 80px; background: #660033;"> </div></td></tr><tr><td style="width: 85px; border: none; padding: 7px; background-color: #331111;"><b style="color: #ffffff; font: bold 13px arial, 'sans serif';">Pride:</td><td style="background: #440011; width: 85px; border: none; font: normal 13px arial, 'sans serif'; padding: 7px; color: #ffffff;">High
</td><td style="border: none; background-color: #331111; width: 200px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; padding-left: 0px;"><div style="height: 14px; border: 1px solid #000000; border-left: none; font-size: 8px; padding: 0px; line-height: 8px; width: 114px; background: #770022;"> </div></td></tr></table>
>
WHAT THE FUCK, I TOTALLY AM NOT WRATHFUL!
edit: oh fuck what did I do?
Post by: MaximumZero on April 15, 2013, 10:03:23 pm
-snip-Do it manually, the forum runs on BBCode, not HTML. I found this out the hard way too, man.
WHAT THE FUCK, I TOTALLY AM NOT WRATHFUL!
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 10:30:09 pm
edit: oh fuck what did I do?This is why you preview posts before you post it.
Post by: Solifuge on April 15, 2013, 10:51:36 pm
Greed: Medium
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: High
Sloth: High
Envy: Very Low
Lust: Medium
Pride: High
WHAT THE FUCK, I TOTALLY AM NOT WRATHFUL!
I fixed that, ya slothful bastard. :3
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on April 15, 2013, 10:54:58 pm
edit: oh fuck what did I do?You've doomed us all. Must be subconscious, from all your wrath.
Spoiler: My Sinlyness (click to show/hide)
...
Yeah, that sounds about right, actually. >.>
Post by: Wrex on April 15, 2013, 11:17:06 pm
Now, imagine any army of Doomguy.
Post by: Tarran on April 15, 2013, 11:23:37 pm
That would mean... the slothful would rule hell! Then we'd be the new demons! And I would be the new Satan because I thought of it first! Ahahahahah! AHAHAHAHAH!
*Ahem*
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 11:25:42 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 11:26:42 pm
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 11:27:36 pm
Who says the wroth are leaving? I'm certainly not. Getting me a dukedom in Hell.They reward that. Initiative pays, dontcha know.
Post by: Frumple on April 15, 2013, 11:28:51 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2013, 11:31:42 pm
"They"? No, no, no, there is no "they". Once the Infernal Revolution is concluded the Independent Dukedom of MetalSlimeHunt is going Robespierre on any demons or damned who don't like how I run things.Who says the wroth are leaving? I'm certainly not. Getting me a dukedom in Hell.They reward that. Initiative pays, dontcha know.
I'm going to have my perfect nation if it is the last thing they ever do.
Post by: Xantalos on April 15, 2013, 11:33:39 pm
Post by: Hanslanda on April 15, 2013, 11:35:34 pm
Introvert(67%) iNtuitive(62%) Thinking(25%) Judging(11%)
•You have distinctive preference of Introversion over Extraversion (67%)
•You have distinctive preference of Intuition over Sensing (62%)
•You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (25%)
•You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (11%)
Greed: Medium
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Medium
Lust: Low
Pride: Low
This I knew. I didn't figure I was much of a glutton, and I really don't think I'm greedy, but meh.
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 12:03:33 am
You'll have to fight the peoples republic of Mcclaystan for control of hell!"They"? No, no, no, there is no "they". Once the Infernal Revolution is concluded the Independent Dukedom of MetalSlimeHunt is going Robespierre on any demons or damned who don't like how I run things.Who says the wroth are leaving? I'm certainly not. Getting me a dukedom in Hell.They reward that. Initiative pays, dontcha know.
I'm going to have my perfect nation if it is the last thing they ever do.
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 09:07:26 am
..."They"? No, no, no, there is no "they". Once the Infernal Revolution is concluded the Independent Dukedom of MetalSlimeHunt is going Robespierre on any demons or damned who don't like how I run things.Who says the wroth are leaving? I'm certainly not. Getting me a dukedom in Hell.They reward that. Initiative pays, dontcha know.
I'm going to have my perfect nation if it is the last thing they ever do.
Are you sure you didn't rank higher on Pride? Because just know, that is literally exactly what all of Pride is thinking come the end of the rein of Satan. Besides, I can gain Support of the Followers of Mammon and Leviathan. (Greed and Envy, Look up the seven princes of Hell).
Post by: Zangi on April 16, 2013, 09:42:30 am
Post by: MaximumZero on April 16, 2013, 10:32:41 am
Greed: MediumStuff like this makes me look like a horrible person. ;_;
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Medium
Lust: Low
Pride: Low
Post by: Dutchling on April 16, 2013, 11:01:59 am
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Very Low
Sloth: Very High
Envy: Low
Lust: Low
Pride: Medium
Except for medium gluttony (a normal diet is gluttonous compared to mine Dx) this seems about right.
Post by: Sigulbard on April 16, 2013, 11:50:10 am
Extravert(1%) Pervert(100%) Sensing(6%) Thinking(38%) Perceiving(22)%
I picked Pride, though Sloth is also a big one.
So many people are introverts here? I expected less, but it makes sense.
Post by: sjm9876 on April 16, 2013, 12:02:30 pm
Introvert(67%) iNtuitive(38%) Thinking(88%) Perceiving(56)%
You have distinctive preference of Introversion over Extraversion (67%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
You have strong preference of Thinking over Feeling (88%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (56%)
Post by: Hanslanda on April 16, 2013, 12:03:05 pm
Greed: MediumStuff like this makes me look like a horrible person. ;_;
Gluttony: Medium
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Medium
Lust: Low
Pride: Low
You're not a horrible person! I'm just an AWESOME person. :P
Hans has leveled up! Hans is now Level Three in Pride!
Post by: Cthulhu on April 16, 2013, 12:23:29 pm
Greed: High
Gluttony: Very High (ugh, i'm not fat...)
Wrath: Low
Sloth: High
Envy: Medium
Lust: High
Pride: Very High
Post by: Frumple on April 16, 2013, 12:30:00 pm
Beyond that, the only one who gets to measure if a person is enjoying their life is that person, really. If a person is content with putting out little effort, then more power to 'em. Many paths through samsara, etc., so forth, so on.
Post by: Jelle on April 16, 2013, 12:31:39 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Strange, truthfully I'm not at all treacherous. I suppose it's my lack of loyalty to begin with.
Post by: Digital Hellhound on April 16, 2013, 12:47:46 pm
Post by: Leatra on April 16, 2013, 01:12:49 pm
Purgatory Repending Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Moderate
Level 2 Lustful Moderate
Level 3 Gluttonous Low
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Very High
Level 7 Violent Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Low
Heretic... No surprise there.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 16, 2013, 01:15:11 pm
Purgatory Repending Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers High
Level 2 Lustful Moderate
Level 3 Gluttonous Moderate
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Very Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Very High
Level 7 Violent Very High <- Note well, for some reason being not-straight seems to count towards this level.
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Low
No surprise that many of us are heretics, though.
Post by: Leatra on April 16, 2013, 01:21:06 pm
Post by: Zangi on April 16, 2013, 01:46:18 pm
Very different from the 7 sins one...
I will not repent.
Purgatory Repending Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Very Low
Level 2 Lustful High
Level 3 Gluttonous High
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious High
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Extreme
Level 7 Violent High
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers High
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous High
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 16, 2013, 01:47:19 pm
Post by: Zangi on April 16, 2013, 01:51:14 pm
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 02:00:54 pm
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Fifth Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | High
Level 7 | High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | High
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
Post by: Lectorog on April 16, 2013, 03:48:50 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
If you look back to the original iteration of the Dante test, lots of us got extreme. Mostly on the heresy.Any coherent theories on why this is?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 16, 2013, 03:52:32 pm
Because this forum has lots of irreligious people.If you look back to the original iteration of the Dante test, lots of us got extreme. Mostly on the heresy.Any coherent theories on why this is?
Post by: 10ebbor10 on April 16, 2013, 03:53:31 pm
Quote from: Level 6 description
failing to believe in God and the afterlife,
Yup, explanation found.
Post by: Shook on April 16, 2013, 04:15:54 pm
Level 1 - Limbo | High
Level 2 | Low
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
The City of Dis, HOW VERY UNEXPECTED. :P
Post by: Leatra on April 16, 2013, 04:45:32 pm
Post by: Lectorog on April 16, 2013, 04:59:06 pm
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 05:36:14 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 05:49:09 pm
You sure you don't have more pride? That's something I would say."They"? No, no, no, there is no "they". Once the Infernal Revolution is concluded the Independent Dukedom of MetalSlimeHunt is going Robespierre on any demons or damned who don't like how I run things.Who says the wroth are leaving? I'm certainly not. Getting me a dukedom in Hell.They reward that. Initiative pays, dontcha know.
I'm going to have my perfect nation if it is the last thing they ever do.
Anyway, I am, unlike all of you, not a heretic. Nor a Virtuous non-believer. Nor, interestingly, am I Avaracious. Nope, It's the 8th level for me. Liars, Panderers, Cheats and Slanderers.
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Eighth Level of Hell - The Malebolge!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Moderate
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | Low
Level 5 | Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very Low
Level 7 | High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Moderate
Hmm. I could actually make it to Purgatory if I play my cards right. You poor saps. All I need to do is do more of the Going to church, and maybe lose some weight and stop being such a sociopath.
Post by: Leatra on April 16, 2013, 06:16:44 pm
Post by: Zangi on April 16, 2013, 06:26:16 pm
Damn, he is going to get off lightly. If going to church gives 1000 good deed points, feeding a beggar probably gives like 15 deed points. Since being a heretic makes us start at around -100,000,000 deed points on the karma meter, we have a long way to go. Maybe we can find a bug or something.Find a virtue and stick to it so hard, that the positive karma of it overcomes your heretical karma.
Post by: Kansa on April 16, 2013, 06:35:56 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Moderate
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Low
Level 5 | Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
It seems like most of us are heretics
Post by: werty892 on April 16, 2013, 06:44:19 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Moderate
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very High
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
I laughed.
Post by: Hanslanda on April 16, 2013, 06:56:08 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
What a surprise! :P
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 06:59:12 pm
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Fifth Level of Hell!Careful there, Cocytus is the worst, frozen in place for all existance. An actual death.
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Moderate
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very High
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html)
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv)
I laughed.
Focus on decreasing your wrath, and maybe we can meet up in the Malebolge (assuming I fail to get to Purgatory). Hanslanda, you too. Go to church once in a blue moon. My circle of hell has serpents!
Post by: Hanslanda on April 16, 2013, 07:03:48 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 07:08:05 pm
Someone just told me to go to church. Urge. To. Kill. Rising.But then I will be all alone in the Malebolge!
Fine, I'll just got to church more myself and stop being such and sociopath and get to Purgatory. Being a heretic is at least 75x worse then Lies and slander apparently.
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 07:17:16 pm
Post by: Cthulhu on April 16, 2013, 07:18:08 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 16, 2013, 07:18:59 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 07:20:51 pm
I did that one a while ago, I don't feel like redoing it. I was Dis, as usual. I think it's designed so pretty much anyone who actively disbelieves and doesn't pussyfoot around it will end up in Dis.Exactly. Which is why I will be chillinz in Heavens wit mah bitchez whll y'all be groanin an moanin.
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 07:22:48 pm
Post by: Leatra on April 16, 2013, 07:25:40 pm
Damn, believers are getting all the booty! My 40 virgins plan is over too. We should all start a Church of Unbelievers or something. If we can find a loophole, we can qualify as believers.I did that one a while ago, I don't feel like redoing it. I was Dis, as usual. I think it's designed so pretty much anyone who actively disbelieves and doesn't pussyfoot around it will end up in Dis.Exactly. Which is why I will be chillinz in Heavens wit mah bitchez whll y'all be groanin an moanin.
Post by: Aqizzar on April 16, 2013, 07:32:22 pm
Quote from: Manny Calavera
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Fifth Level of Hell!
The river Styx runs through this level of Hell, and in it are punished the wrathful and the gloomy. The former are forever lashing out at each other in anger, furious and naked, tearing each other piecemeal with their teeth. The latter are gurgling in the black mud, slothful and sullen, withdrawn from the world. Their lamentations bubble to the surface as they try to repeat a doleful hymn, though with unbroken words they cannot say it. Because you lived a cruel, vindictive and hateful life, you meet your fate in the Styx.
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Moderate
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | High
Well, I would have expected I'd be joining the swinging party in Dis, where the fun never stops because God DGAF, but apparently I'll be spending eternity throwing punches in the trailer park outside. Damn.
Post by: Vector on April 16, 2013, 07:34:02 pm
. . . VIRGIN POWER
Purgatory Repenting Believers Moderate
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Very High
Level 2 Lustful Very Low
Level 3 Gluttonous Low
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Very Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Low
Level 7 Violent Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Low
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 07:34:59 pm
Quote from: Manny CalaveraThe Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Fifth Level of Hell!
The river Styx runs through this level of Hell, and in it are punished the wrathful and the gloomy. The former are forever lashing out at each other in anger, furious and naked, tearing each other piecemeal with their teeth. The latter are gurgling in the black mud, slothful and sullen, withdrawn from the world. Their lamentations bubble to the surface as they try to repeat a doleful hymn, though with unbroken words they cannot say it. Because you lived a cruel, vindictive and hateful life, you meet your fate in the Styx.
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Moderate
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | High
Well, I would have expected I'd be joining the swinging party in Dis, where the fun never stops because God DGAF, but apparently I'll be spending eternity throwing punches in the trailer park outside. Damn.
OH COME ONDamnit. We need more peoples in the Malebolge.
. . . VIRGIN POWER
Purgatory Repenting Believers Moderate
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Very High
Level 2 Lustful Very Low
Level 3 Gluttonous Low
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Very Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Low
Level 7 Violent Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Low
Post by: Leatra on April 16, 2013, 07:39:33 pm
Post by: Max White on April 16, 2013, 07:48:15 pm
Ha!
Eigth Level of Hell - the Malebolge
Many and varied sinners suffer eternally in the multi-leveled Malebolge, an ampitheatre-shapped pit of despair Wholly of stone and of an iron colour: Those guilty of fraudulence and malice; the seducers and pimps, who are whipped by horned demons; the hypocrites, who struggle to walk in lead-lined cloaks; the barraters, who are ducked in boiling pitch by demons known as the Malebranche. The simonists, wedged into stone holes, and whose feet are licked by flames, kick and writhe desperately. The magicians, diviners, fortune tellers, and panderers are all here, as are the thieves. Some wallow in human excrement. Serpents writhe and wrap around men, sometimes fusing into each other. Bodies are torn apart. When you arrive, you will want to put your hands over your ears because of the lamentations of the sinners here, who are afflicted with scabs like leprosy, and lay sick on the ground, furiously scratching their skin off with their nails. Indeed, justice divine doth smite them with its hammer.
Level 1 - Moderate
Level 2 - High
Level 3 - Low
Level 4 - Low
Level 5 - Low
Level 6 - Very High
Level 7 - Moderate
Level 8 - Very High
Level 9 - Moderate
Post by: Cthulhu on April 16, 2013, 07:52:53 pm
As for Malebolge, Mohammad is there and he's a real drag.
Post by: Aqizzar on April 16, 2013, 08:00:27 pm
Post by: Max White on April 16, 2013, 08:02:16 pm
The hell guys? Is Dis having a party and nobody told me? What are you all doing hanging out in that musky old city when we have an all night disco down here in the amphitheatre.
Post by: Pnx on April 16, 2013, 08:17:09 pm
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Moderate
Level 2 Lustful Moderate
Level 3 Gluttonous Low
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy High
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Extreme
Level 7 Violent High
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Moderate
Looks like I'm gonna be spending a lot of time chilling with the heretics in the City of Dis... What's going on there?
Party at the Iron City. I'll be picking up some fine-ass debbies on Floor 2, we'll listen to music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obkI7dE4o5w) and discuss how god isn't real/god is real but fuck'im.
As for Malebolge, Mohammad is there and he's a real drag.
What kind of dresscode you guys got? 'Cause, uh, I know a bunch of people who'd kill for a good party, really just give'm a reason, but the height of fashion is mud and more mud. But if you want a kickass mosh pit, man can they provide.Heavy metal, mosh pits... debbies. Man I know there's a lot of people that love that stuff, but all of this sounds a lot closer to my idea of- ... oh right, that would make sense.
Post by: Xantalos on April 16, 2013, 08:24:56 pm
That's how I've avoided being there. Because Christianity is the biggest religion on earth, agonistic souks and stuff like that just get forwarded to the Dante afterlife. Counts for me too, because despite being an eldritch abomination, I'm still stuck in a mortal body. The thing I've done is found a religion where I'm the god and get to decide what I want to do after this meat sack expires.Damn, believers are getting all the booty! My 40 virgins plan is over too. We should all start a Church of Unbelievers or something. If we can find a loophole, we can qualify as believers.I did that one a while ago, I don't feel like redoing it. I was Dis, as usual. I think it's designed so pretty much anyone who actively disbelieves and doesn't pussyfoot around it will end up in Dis.Exactly. Which is why I will be chillinz in Heavens wit mah bitchez whll y'all be groanin an moanin.
Post by: werty892 on April 16, 2013, 08:44:10 pm
Post by: Catsup on April 16, 2013, 08:53:35 pm
Purgatory Repending Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Low
Level 2 Lustful High
Level 3 Gluttonous Moderate
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious High
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Very High
Level 7 Violent Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers High
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Very High
@ OP
Introvert(78%) Sensing(12%) Thinking(12%) Perceiving(33)%
You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (78%)
You have slight preference of Sensing over Intuition (12%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (12%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (33%)
so apparently im banished to the 6th level. Fair enough, i dont believe in god or the afterlife. When you die you cease to exist, you never know you existed or that you died. Its like a dreamless sleep.
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 09:02:18 pm
Post by: Vector on April 16, 2013, 09:05:52 pm
(I said I didn't believe, though, because I don't think it counts by Christian standards)
Post by: Tarran on April 16, 2013, 09:08:11 pm
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Very HighOoh, you almost got punishment by Satan himself. Dodged a bullet there.
so apparently im banished to the 6th level. Fair enough, i dont believe in god or the afterlife. When you die you cease to exist, you never know you existed or that you died. Its like a dreamless sleep.
Post by: Catsup on April 16, 2013, 09:19:39 pm
The problem is I do believe in an afterlife. It's called "the impacts of your actions continuing to exist." It's just that you don't get to be conscious for that.nothing matters anymore after you die... its a little difficult to think about since your obviously still alive, but its the truth.
(I said I didn't believe, though, because I don't think it counts by Christian standards)
Post by: Vector on April 16, 2013, 09:21:27 pm
Post by: Solifuge on April 16, 2013, 10:08:08 pm
. . . I disagree, but arguing over it is probably not worth it.The problem is I do believe in an afterlife. It's called "the impacts of your actions continuing to exist." It's just that you don't get to be conscious for that.nothing matters anymore after you die... its a little difficult to think about since your obviously still alive, but its the truth.
Don't think it has to constitute an argument; might just be a miscommunication. Things may not matter for ourselves after we die, but that doesn't mean they won't keep mattering to everyone and everything else we shared the universe. Too much focus on "leaving everything behind after death," whether it's through an ascension to another spiritual plane or consciousness receding into endless nothingness, isn't conducive to Big-Picture Good.
To me, morality consists of trying to leave each situation better than it was when you found it. This goes for the people you meet in your daily travels, and for the world we inhabit during the course of our lifetimes.
Post by: Zrk2 on April 16, 2013, 10:17:55 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 10:23:28 pm
As accurate today as it was back then...High-five! We be chilling with our lead-cloaks. Watching shit go down. I can only hope there will be demon fights.Ha!
Eigth Level of Hell - the Malebolge
Many and varied sinners suffer eternally in the multi-leveled Malebolge, an ampitheatre-shapped pit of despair Wholly of stone and of an iron colour: Those guilty of fraudulence and malice; the seducers and pimps, who are whipped by horned demons; the hypocrites, who struggle to walk in lead-lined cloaks; the barraters, who are ducked in boiling pitch by demons known as the Malebranche. The simonists, wedged into stone holes, and whose feet are licked by flames, kick and writhe desperately. The magicians, diviners, fortune tellers, and panderers are all here, as are the thieves. Some wallow in human excrement. Serpents writhe and wrap around men, sometimes fusing into each other. Bodies are torn apart. When you arrive, you will want to put your hands over your ears because of the lamentations of the sinners here, who are afflicted with scabs like leprosy, and lay sick on the ground, furiously scratching their skin off with their nails. Indeed, justice divine doth smite them with its hammer.
Level 1 - Moderate
Level 2 - High
Level 3 - Low
Level 4 - Low
Level 5 - Low
Level 6 - Very High
Level 7 - Moderate
Level 8 - Very High
Level 9 - Moderate
It occurs to me if I play my cards right, I might be the only member of Bay12 to end up in purgatory. Don't worry, I'll put a good word in with the Big Man for you guys.
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on April 16, 2013, 10:28:34 pm
Code: [Select]
Purgatory |Repending Believers |Very High
Level 1 - Limbo |Virtuous Non-Believers |High
Level 2 |Lustful |Low
Level 3 |Gluttonous |Low
Level 4 |Prodigal and Avaricious |Very Low
Level 5 |Wrathful and Gloomy |Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis |Heretics |Very Low
Level 7 |Violent |Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge |Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers |Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus |Treacherous |LowWelp, Purgatory for me, folks.
Post by: misko27 on April 16, 2013, 10:31:03 pm
...Code: [Select]Purgatory |Repending Believers |Very High
Level 1 - Limbo |Virtuous Non-Believers |High
Level 2 |Lustful |Low
Level 3 |Gluttonous |Low
Level 4 |Prodigal and Avaricious |Very Low
Level 5 |Wrathful and Gloomy |Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis |Heretics |Very Low
Level 7 |Violent |Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge |Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers |Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus |Treacherous |Low
Welp, Purgatory for me, folks.
KILL THE PROPER CHRISTIAN. BURN HIM. SEND HIM TO HIS MAKER.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 16, 2013, 10:33:14 pm
Post by: Lectorog on April 16, 2013, 10:35:45 pm
Guys, if you don't sin, Jesus died for nothing. So sin away!This is one of the best things I've heard recently.
Comeon, we got an AMPHITHEATRE. And people who walk on the right side of the road. Yeah, Fuck British people.I live in America and walk on the left side of the road. Yeah, fuck oncoming vehicles.
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on April 16, 2013, 10:47:51 pm
I die a Martyr. Sweet....Code: [Select]Purgatory |Repending Believers |Very High
Level 1 - Limbo |Virtuous Non-Believers |High
Level 2 |Lustful |Low
Level 3 |Gluttonous |Low
Level 4 |Prodigal and Avaricious |Very Low
Level 5 |Wrathful and Gloomy |Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis |Heretics |Very Low
Level 7 |Violent |Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge |Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers |Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus |Treacherous |Low
Welp, Purgatory for me, folks.
KILL THE PROPER CHRISTIAN. BURN HIM. SEND HIM TO HIS MAKER.
Post by: Solifuge on April 16, 2013, 10:51:02 pm
Purgatory - Repenting Believers - Very Low
** Level 1 - Limbo - Virtuous Non-Believers - High <===== YOU ARE HERE
Level 2 - Lustful - Moderate
Level 3 - Gluttonous - Moderate
Level 4 - Prodigal and Avaricious - Very Low
Level 5 - Wrathful and Gloomy - Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis - Heretics - High
Level 7 - Violent - Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers High
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Low
...The secret is only pandering, lying, and acting on malice Virtuously! Somehow!
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 16, 2013, 10:58:04 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | High
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very Low
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
I don't have neighbors, do I?
Post by: Tarran on April 16, 2013, 10:59:13 pm
Post by: Xantalos on April 16, 2013, 11:02:57 pm
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Sixth Level of Hell - The City of Dis!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | High
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Low
Level 5 | Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Post by: Brotato on April 16, 2013, 11:29:30 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on April 16, 2013, 11:36:29 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Moderate
Level 2 | Low
Level 3 | Low
Level 4 | Moderate
Level 5 | Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | High
Dis city? What about dat city?
Post by: Wrex on April 16, 2013, 11:38:40 pm
"Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad."
That is surprising, though.
Post by: mcclay on April 16, 2013, 11:40:27 pm
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Fifth Level of Hell!High fist my brothera! Let's beat up all these other wrathful fucks and piss on Dis's doorstep!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | High
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very Low
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
I don't have neighbors, do I?
Post by: Xantalos on April 16, 2013, 11:41:23 pm
As purgatory is just torment that lasts thousands upon thousands of years instead of eternally, according to Dante and the catholic church of the time, envy you I do not.How do you even get in there? I picked the most virtuous answers I could find bar believing in God or go to church but still got heretic.
"Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad."
That is surprising, though.
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 16, 2013, 11:42:17 pm
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Fifth Level of Hell!High fist my brothera! Let's beat up all these other wrathful fucks and piss on Dis's doorstep!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | High
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very Low
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
I don't have neighbors, do I?
Fuck Yeah! Let's give them a taste of our knuckles homie!
Post by: Wrex on April 16, 2013, 11:42:42 pm
How do you even get in there? I picked the most virtuous answers I could find bar believing in God or go to church but still got heretic.
[/quote]
That's an intresting question, considering I didn't answer in the affirmative for any of those either.
Post by: Xantalos on April 16, 2013, 11:49:39 pm
How do you even get in there? I picked the most virtuous answers I could find bar believing in God or go to church but still got heretic.
That's an intresting question, considering I didn't answer in the affirmative for any of those either.
[/quote]
It mightve been my answer on the military question.
Post by: Vector on April 16, 2013, 11:49:44 pm
Post by: Max White on April 16, 2013, 11:52:37 pm
Post by: Xantalos on April 16, 2013, 11:57:00 pm
It is based on christian writings, either you are a god fearing bigot or you go to hell. Heck if you are really careful you might get some sort of middle ground... Point is this sort of quiz is more of a joke than any measure of morality.HEY! S'a measure of GUD FUNDAMANTEL CRISTIN MORALITI!
Post by: Wrex on April 16, 2013, 11:59:27 pm
Post by: Vector on April 16, 2013, 11:59:56 pm
Post by: Brotato on April 17, 2013, 12:43:53 am
As purgatory is just torment that lasts thousands upon thousands of years instead of eternally, according to Dante and the catholic church of the time, envy you I do not.
"Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad."
That is surprising, though.
That sounds, so, so much nicer than purgatory. If being pagan gets me a better afterlife than I demand a refund! Seriously, heaven better have 77^77 virgins or whatever it is. Hanging out with Socrates and Aristotle for eternity sounds awesome.
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 12:48:29 am
Actually better than Heaven, where you spend all eternity singing to God.As purgatory is just torment that lasts thousands upon thousands of years instead of eternally, according to Dante and the catholic church of the time, envy you I do not.
"Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad."
That is surprising, though.
That sounds, so, so much nicer than purgatory. If being pagan gets me a better afterlife than I demand a refund! Seriously, heaven better have 77^77 virgins or whatever it is. Hanging out with Socrates and Aristotle for eternity sounds awesome.
Post by: Max White on April 17, 2013, 12:49:09 am
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 12:51:56 am
I would take a finite existence over eternity any day...Ah, then you at least truly know your own disposition toward eternity. Good.
Post by: Wrex on April 17, 2013, 01:08:38 am
As purgatory is just torment that lasts thousands upon thousands of years instead of eternally, according to Dante and the catholic church of the time, envy you I do not.
"Charon ushers you across the river Acheron, and you find yourself upon the brink of grief's abysmal valley. You are in Limbo, a place of sorrow without torment. You encounter a seven-walled castle, and within those walls you find rolling fresh meadows illuminated by the light of reason, whereabout many shades dwell. These are the virtuous pagans, the great philosophers and authors, unbaptised children, and others unfit to enter the kingdom of heaven. You share company with Caesar, Homer, Virgil, Socrates, and Aristotle. There is no punishment here, and the atmosphere is peaceful, yet sad."
That is surprising, though.
That sounds, so, so much nicer than purgatory. If being pagan gets me a better afterlife than I demand a refund! Seriously, heaven better have 77^77 virgins or whatever it is. Hanging out with Socrates and Aristotle for eternity sounds awesome.
The purgatorio talks about what those in purgatory have to endure, if it matters. The proud, for example, are crushed beneath large rocks while joyously singing the lord's prayer for a few thousand years. Unlike in hell, where you end up in one location forever, everyone in purgatory endures each of it's torments for period coresponding to their level of sin, generally several millenia at the least per sin, unless you bought indulgences from the church or were a saint.
The punishments of Purgatory:
The proud: Crushed under rocks while chanting the lord's prayer
The envious: Their eyes are sown shut, and they are clad in pentiental cloaks. Cain is apparently still here when Dante reaches it.
The Wrathful: Choked with toxic, blinding smoke, while chanting Angus Dei
The Slothful: Run without rest, ever.
The greedy: They lie face down in the dust while chanting a line from Psalm 119:25
The gluttonous: Starved, and forced to stare at food on trees that they can never reach
The lustful: Set on fire, while screaming out examples of lust.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 17, 2013, 01:11:11 am
Post by: mcclay on April 17, 2013, 01:13:07 am
Post by: Wrex on April 17, 2013, 01:17:42 am
Dante described the events of Purgatory to be labors rather than punishment, as they are engaged by the souls there willingly in order to burn away their sins.
Mmm, point, although to me it seems a matter of semantics if anything.
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 01:18:41 am
And then Paradiso, where you sing.Dante described the events of Purgatory to be labors rather than punishment, as they are engaged by the souls there willingly in order to burn away their sins.
Mmm, point, although to me it seems a matter of semantics if anything.
Post by: mcclay on April 17, 2013, 01:25:10 am
Is that really all he said you do?And then Paradiso, where you sing.Dante described the events of Purgatory to be labors rather than punishment, as they are engaged by the souls there willingly in order to burn away their sins.
Mmm, point, although to me it seems a matter of semantics if anything.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 17, 2013, 01:28:41 am
Can you tell it was a different time?
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 17, 2013, 02:05:22 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 02:09:49 am
It must suck for those guys in coffins down there forever.
Post by: Frumple on April 17, 2013, 07:12:41 am
Pretty much. The souls in Paradiso are all pure of sinful desire, i.e. all they want to do is sing praises to god for the rest of time.Heh. Yeah, that was one of the things that's always bothered me about the Christian afterlife myth. Apparently if you do good and get into heaven, God rewards you by stripping part of your soul away so that you're no longer capable of feeling anything but love for Him. No pain, or the capacity to feel pain, no negative emotions or the capacity for negative emotions, no empathy with those under the effect of either or the capacity to feel such empathy, etc., so forth, so on. From what I remember of the wording it simply entails that upon being assimilated into heaven you're no longer capable, at all, of experiencing evil in any form.
Can you tell it was a different time?
At the very least in hell you remain something still approaching human. To reach heaven is to be reduced to a one-dimensional shadow of what you once were. That's pretty damn terrifying for the supposed Good End.
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on April 17, 2013, 07:24:19 am
That sounds, so, so much nicer than purgatory. If being pagan gets me a better afterlife than I demand a refund! Seriously, heaven better have 77^77 virgins or whatever it is. Hanging out with Socrates and Aristotle for eternity sounds awesome.
7777 virgins=18188037387806198379277339915556929647807403283187048631478337739929618787870634227045716719924575689062274471430368865388203540672666042530996797 virgins.
:o
Post by: Zangi on April 17, 2013, 07:28:06 am
At some point, God is just going to have to use teens and children... and that is per person?That sounds, so, so much nicer than purgatory. If being pagan gets me a better afterlife than I demand a refund! Seriously, heaven better have 77^77 virgins or whatever it is. Hanging out with Socrates and Aristotle for eternity sounds awesome.
7777 virgins=18188037387806198379277339915556929647807403283187048631478337739929618787870634227045716719924575689062274471430368865388203540672666042530996797 virgins.
:o
Post by: Max White on April 17, 2013, 07:34:39 am
I mean an unopened wine bottle is a virgin wine bottle, and they do talk about wine a lot in a lot of holy books. Perhaps heaven is just a really fancy booze up?
Post by: werty892 on April 17, 2013, 08:29:40 am
"WOooooooooooo, welcome to heaven man, here is your 77 wine bottles, lets go check out those virgins over there. You see dat ass?"
Post by: Lagslayer on April 17, 2013, 09:02:21 am
Its really a huge college frat party.Instant head canon.
"WOooooooooooo, welcome to heaven man, here is your 77 wine bottles, lets go check out those virgins over there. You see dat ass?"
Post by: misko27 on April 17, 2013, 09:05:47 am
And what if you are female? Are there male virgins? That's sad.
Post by: Zangi on April 17, 2013, 09:37:05 am
Why must it always be virgins though? Wassup wit dat man?Well, maybe females were promised something else? *shrug*
And what if you are female? Are there male virgins? That's sad.
Society had a much more patriarchal outlook back then?
Post by: mcclay on April 17, 2013, 09:39:17 am
:P
Post by: Aptus on April 17, 2013, 11:25:47 am
Sin Test:
Your sin has been measured. You have committed many sins, but Lust is the mortal sin that has done you in. Just below, discover your full sinful breakdown and learn what it is about you that codemns you to hell.
Greed: Very High
Gluttony: High
Wrath: Medium
Sloth: Medium
Envy: Medium
Lust: Very High
Pride: High
Circle of Hell: (I think I have done this before, way back.)
Sixth Level of Hell - The City of Dis
Woo serpentladies!
Post by: werty892 on April 17, 2013, 11:51:47 am
;)
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Extreme
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | Extreme
Level 5 | Extreme
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Extreme
Level 7 | Extreme
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Extreme
Level 9 - Cocytus | Extreme
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
Post by: Ameablable on April 17, 2013, 01:30:14 pm
Quote
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Sixth Level of Hell - The City of Dis!Level | Score
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very High
aw titties. im a heretic because i'm an atheist.
apparently i'm also very Wrathful and Gloomy
Post by: da_nang on April 17, 2013, 01:40:41 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Low
Level 2 | Low
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Moderate
No surprise there. Agnostic atheism FTW!
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 17, 2013, 01:52:39 pm
Sixth Level of Hell - The City of DisThe land of excess is a giant tornado. So I guess it's heaven for adrenaline junkies, everyone else not so much :P
Woo serpentladies!
Post by: Shook on April 17, 2013, 02:08:15 pm
perhaps............... perhaps i am in dis right now and this life is all an imagination from my tortured body in dis!!
i am not safe here
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 17, 2013, 02:10:25 pm
Post by: Haspen on April 17, 2013, 02:13:19 pm
Post by: Ameablable on April 17, 2013, 02:14:44 pm
Post by: DarkWolfXV on April 17, 2013, 02:19:59 pm
Im missing the party in City of Dis, and meeting Socrates.
Fuuuuuu
Post by: Frumple on April 17, 2013, 02:25:18 pm
Imagine a homeless military veteran walking up to you as you go down the street and asking, "What is love?"
Then following you around and bugging you until you answer. That's basically Socrates, the homeless vet known as the Gadfly of Athens.
Post by: Haspen on April 17, 2013, 02:26:54 pm
Imagine a homeless military veteran walking up to you as you go down the street and asking, "What is love?"
But would he follow with "Baby don't hurt me"? :P
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 02:28:19 pm
Meeting Socrates would probably be a combination of awesome, annoying, and terrifying.Did people beat the crap out of him too? Because if so, he could make a case for suing Haddaway.
Imagine a homeless military veteran walking up to you as you go down the street and asking, "What is love?"
Then following you around and bugging you until you answer. That's basically Socrates, the homeless vet known as the Gadfly of Athens.
Post by: Ameablable on April 17, 2013, 02:30:12 pm
Damnit Haspen! I literally just hit post but then it said Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.Imagine a homeless military veteran walking up to you as you go down the street and asking, "What is love?"
But would he follow with "Baby don't hurt me"? :P
Damn you Haspen! Damn you to the sixth level of hell!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 17, 2013, 02:32:16 pm
Did people beat the crap out of him too? Because if so, he could make a case for suing Haddaway.Not really, but he was apparently extremely annoying. Read some of his dialogues on metaphysics and you will quickly start to understand why. Remember, Socrates was against using the written word, we only have his stuff because Plato followed him around every day writing down what he was telling people.
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 02:33:03 pm
Trust me, I know. He's kinda like me when I'm feeling really asinine.Did people beat the crap out of him too? Because if so, he could make a case for suing Haddaway.Not really, but he was apparently extremely annoying. Read some of his dialogues on metaphysics and you will quickly start to understand why. Remember, Socrates was against using the written word, we only have his stuff because Plato followed him around every day writing down what he was telling people.
Post by: Lectorog on April 17, 2013, 04:33:23 pm
This is terrifying.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Paganism is most often used as a general term for the pre-monotheistic faiths of Europe.It's often used interchangeably with "nature gods", regardless of accuracy.
Paganism is not satanism. Do not fall for this common misconception.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 17, 2013, 04:56:45 pm
All those sentences rowed up next to one another would seem to imply a belief in bronze age Europeans worshiping the almighty Stan.Paganism is most often used as a general term for the pre-monotheistic faiths of Europe.It's often used interchangeably with "nature gods", regardless of accuracy.
Paganism is not satanism. Do not fall for this common misconception.
STAAAAAAAN
Post by: Lectorog on April 17, 2013, 05:25:21 pm
That was not intended, though it would make for an interesting transition to Christianity.All those sentences rowed up next to one another would seem to imply a belief in bronze age Europeans worshiping the almighty Stan.Paganism is most often used as a general term for the pre-monotheistic faiths of Europe.It's often used interchangeably with "nature gods", regardless of accuracy.
Paganism is not satanism. Do not fall for this common misconception.
STAAAAAAAN
Post by: misko27 on April 17, 2013, 06:44:42 pm
Did this again, this time honestlyThis scares me a little. I am A narcissistic sociopath who dreams of cruelties done in his name, and wealth beyond all measure, and I scored lower on the Malebolge then you. And, most things.
;)
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Extreme
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | Extreme
Level 5 | Extreme
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Extreme
Level 7 | Extreme
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Extreme
Level 9 - Cocytus | Extreme
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html)
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv)
Seriously dude. Seriously. I am actually a little scared of you right now. Because, erm, Man. I have only ever seen that level of Sin on one man, and that is my father. And he is not a nice man.
Post by: Lectorog on April 17, 2013, 07:12:56 pm
Post by: werty892 on April 17, 2013, 07:32:03 pm
Post by: Xantalos on April 17, 2013, 08:07:05 pm
I tried taking the test while I was mad and I got about the same results.Did this again, this time honestlyThis scares me a little. I am A narcissistic sociopath who dreams of cruelties done in his name, and wealth beyond all measure, and I scored lower on the Malebolge then you. And, most things.
;)
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Extreme
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | Extreme
Level 5 | Extreme
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Extreme
Level 7 | Extreme
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Extreme
Level 9 - Cocytus | Extreme
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html)
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv (http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv)
Seriously dude. Seriously. I am actually a little scared of you right now. Because, erm, Man. I have only ever seen that level of Sin on one man, and that is my father. And he is not a nice man.
Post by: werty892 on April 17, 2013, 08:26:03 pm
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Post by: Tarran on April 17, 2013, 09:47:11 pm
Post by: Max White on April 17, 2013, 09:48:00 pm
What sort of computer are you working on?
Post by: Leatra on April 17, 2013, 09:54:50 pm
[Fuckin' winks all over]But you failed for not being gluttony enough. Level 3 is only "Very High". This is not acceptable. Sin harder! (wow, that sounded weird)
Post by: Tarran on April 17, 2013, 09:58:42 pm
???Quad core 2.3 CPU with 12GB of RAM and NVIDIA Geforce GTX 670. In other words, the ASUS G75VW-DS73-3D. I think.
What sort of computer are you working on?
Post by: Brotato on April 17, 2013, 10:18:03 pm
Post by: mcclay on April 17, 2013, 10:22:33 pm
Wow, that's enough smilies to create a very small amount of lag while scrolling up and down.It bends a little when you scroll past it. I think it may be a minor break in reality.
Post by: Tarran on April 17, 2013, 10:30:51 pm
Maybe it's his internet then. No lag on my craptop....I'm pretty sure this forum loads everything the first time you enter the page and keeps it in memory. And I can watch Youtube videos in decent quality without pausing most of the time. So no, not my internet.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 17, 2013, 10:52:23 pm
Post by: werty892 on April 17, 2013, 10:58:20 pm
The problem is that there is one question where it is lust or gluttony. You can have one but not both.[Fuckin' winks all over]But you failed for not being gluttony enough. Level 3 is only "Very High". This is not acceptable. Sin harder! (wow, that sounded weird)
Also smiles have been reduced.
Post by: Blargityblarg on April 18, 2013, 06:02:14 am
Level Who are sent there? Score
Purgatory Repending Believers Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo Virtuous Non-Believers Low
Level 2 Lustful High
Level 3 Gluttonous Very High
Level 4 Prodigal and Avaricious Low
Level 5 Wrathful and Gloomy Moderate
Level 6 - The City of Dis Heretics Very High
Level 7 Violent High
Level 8 - The Malebolge Fraudulent, Malicious, Panderers Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus Treacherous Moderate
Post by: Tack on April 18, 2013, 08:52:08 am
Spoiler: Personality results (click to show/hide)
Post by: mcclay on April 18, 2013, 10:15:40 am
Introvert(44%) iNtuitive(50%) Thinking(38%) Judging(1%)
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (44%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (50%)
You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (38%)
You have marginal or no preference of Judging over Perceiving (1%)
Woo thinking man!
Post by: Ameablable on April 18, 2013, 01:45:52 pm
Post by: Diablous on April 18, 2013, 02:13:47 pm
103 members voted. and noone has greed or envy as their highest sin? damn we are terrible people.
You think the site that hosts a game about dwarves would have more greedy people, wouldn't ya. It's weird.
Anyway, since we're doing this old Dante test again:
The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | High
Level 1 - Limbo | Very High
Level 2 | Low
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Very Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very Low
Level 7 | Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Low
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
About the same as last time I did it, IIRC.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 18, 2013, 02:21:30 pm
REVEAL YOUR SECRETS UNTO US!
Post by: MonkeyHead on April 18, 2013, 02:22:45 pm
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Very Low
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Extreme
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Extreme
Level 7 | Extreme
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Extreme
Level 9 - Cocytus | Extreme
Post by: Zrk2 on April 18, 2013, 02:23:35 pm
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Moderate
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
Post by: Diablous on April 18, 2013, 03:01:05 pm
How did you avoid dis?
REVEAL YOUR SECRETS UNTO US!
Me? Well, I said I believed in god and an afterlife, so it's probably that. Try not being a heretic. You don't actually go to church or really do anything (I said I didn't and that's probably why I got Limbo instead of Purgatory). So yeah, be less of a heretic and you too can spend the rest of eternity with a bunch of dead Grecians.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 18, 2013, 03:02:30 pm
How did you avoid dis?I avoided Dis. Then again, I'm Señor Facepuncho.
REVEAL YOUR SECRETS UNTO US!
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 18, 2013, 03:03:41 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on April 18, 2013, 03:04:37 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 18, 2013, 03:05:47 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on April 18, 2013, 03:08:51 pm
FakeEdit: Retook the test again, answering each question with a little bit of thought behind the process therein. This is what I came up with:
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Very High
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | Very High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Extreme
Level 7 | Extreme
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | High
It's a good thing I self-identify as evil, or I'd probably feel really, really bad about myself right about now.
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 18, 2013, 03:11:02 pm
The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very High
Level 2 | Moderate
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
I basically just changed my answer to 'do you have pagan beliefs?' to yes and I was gold. I'm not actually sure if I do or not, it depends on interpretation and I don't know which one the test uses, but hey, at least there's a /possibility/ for limbo!
Post by: Tarran on April 18, 2013, 03:31:34 pm
Correction: I smashed my way through to a lower level. With my fist.Good job, you smashed so hard that you flew past Dis where everyone else was having a party. Good luck getting back up.
FakeEdit: Retook the test again, answering each question with a little bit of thought behind the process therein. This is what I came up with:
The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | Very High
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | Very High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Extreme
Level 7 | Extreme
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | High
It's a good thing I self-identify as evil, or I'd probably feel really, really bad about myself right about now.
Post by: MonkeyHead on April 18, 2013, 03:33:41 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 18, 2013, 03:45:41 pm
It's a good thing I self-identify as evil, or I'd probably feel really, really bad about myself right about now.
I think if you're getting values that high, you've had to have moved well beyond things like shame, regret, guilt, or any of the various things that would be likely to leave you feeling bad about the results.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 18, 2013, 04:31:58 pm
103 members voted. and noone has greed or envy as their highest sin? damn we are terrible people.Noone is not a world nor has it ever been one.
Off to Cocytus you go!
Post by: Frumple on April 18, 2013, 04:41:15 pm
Eehh. Someone'll name a planet after a dude named Noone sooner or later. I'd let it slide, this time. Investing in the future!103 members voted. and noone has greed or envy as their highest sin? damn we are terrible people.Noone is not a world nor has it ever been one.
Off to Cocytus you go!
Post by: Tack on April 18, 2013, 06:03:41 pm
And got put in Limbo.
And then answered it again, but truthfully, and repented for the whopping lie I had just told the massive online quiz.
And got put in Level 2!
Post by: Megaman on April 18, 2013, 06:11:58 pm
Quote
The Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very High
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Low
Level 7 | Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Maybe I should go to church more often
Post by: MaximumZero on April 18, 2013, 06:30:02 pm
Maybe you should go to Fight Club more often.QuoteThe Dante's Inferno Test has sent you to the First Level of Hell - Limbo!
Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very High
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Moderate
Level 4 | Very Low
Level 5 | Low
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Low
Level 7 | Low
Level 8 - The Malebolge | Moderate
Level 9 - Cocytus | Low
Maybe I should go to church more often
Probably not. Honestly, I'm just an "angry atheist" who just so happens to have a violent favorite pasttime, and a firm belief that some people just need a good stick to the chops because they're stupid. I'm not going to go attack people on the street just to watch them bleed, like the test (and some forumites) may lead you to believe. That said, if someone decides to attack me, I'll gleefully defend myself to the greatest degree I can.It's a good thing I self-identify as evil, or I'd probably feel really, really bad about myself right about now.
I think if you're getting values that high, you've had to have moved well beyond things like shame, regret, guilt, or any of the various things that would be likely to leave you feeling bad about the results.
Post by: Shook on April 18, 2013, 06:48:27 pm
thus do i propose a tenth level
Level 10 - MZ's Fist | OHFU-
please don't punch my face too much out of sync with the universe
In slightly more (less?) serious news, i'm not at all surprised to have been put in Dis. I consider myself a decently nice chap, but i'm not exactly the picture of piety (in fact i'm surprised i didn't get EXTREME'd at herecy). So far, i remain unsmitten by righteous divine meteors, but we'll see. Also, if the meteor misses me, i'll have something to write a bachelor about. :P
Post by: misko27 on April 18, 2013, 08:16:10 pm
Post by: mcclay on April 18, 2013, 08:18:51 pm
Post by: sjm9876 on April 19, 2013, 09:47:38 am
http://www.colorquiz.com/
Post by: Digital Hellhound on April 19, 2013, 09:59:48 am
interesting test here. Seems like bull but was suprisingly accurate for me:
http://www.colorquiz.com/
Bwah, came up pretty much the complete opposite of accurate. Maybe that signifies something on its own. Colors are really not something to base a person's personality and life on.
Would be nice to have a new poll at some point, this is fun.
Post by: sjm9876 on April 19, 2013, 10:04:14 am
Post by: mcclay on April 19, 2013, 10:05:47 am
Post by: Dutchling on April 19, 2013, 10:06:33 am
Thanks color test.
Post by: misko27 on April 19, 2013, 10:07:12 am
It ignores most of my positive qualities though. Sums me up as a arrogant, distant asshat, who longs for social contact. Which is mostly true, but it ignores my redeeming qualities.
Post by: sjm9876 on April 19, 2013, 10:10:06 am
Post by: Digital Hellhound on April 19, 2013, 10:14:10 am
Post by: MaximumZero on April 19, 2013, 10:20:29 am
It's a bunch of vague, common personality traits and feelings. I'd be more surprised if it never fit for anyone.Yeah, it seems a lot like an interactive horoscope. That said:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Frumple on April 19, 2013, 10:21:42 am
Especially after giving it a try turned up a 100% wiff, wrong on every category result.
Thing's basically the old fortune teller/prophecy maker's trick. "So vague it could apply to anyone(/anything), so specific it can only be you(/a particular instance)"
It's a silly thing anyway. Colors are pretty well established to only have meaning in relation to the cultural framework they're being interpreted through, last time I checked. Might be some odd minor influences with certain hues (blood, etc.) outside of that, but nothing particularly influential. Bupkis test is bupkis :-\
Post by: MaximumZero on April 19, 2013, 10:23:12 am
Post by: Frumple on April 19, 2013, 10:25:16 am
Post by: Shook on April 19, 2013, 10:27:04 am
bupkisI LIKE THIS WORD
Also took the test, got stamped as a conceited loner/recluse who easily gets insulted and needs to get away from others. Not COMPLETELY wrong, but i'm not THAT reclusive.
Post by: Xantalos on April 19, 2013, 10:44:25 am
"Searching for a close bond with others which are accepting and kind. Needs a safe, peaceful atmosphere."
Your Stress Sources
"Demands to be noticed by others as an important individual, needs attention and recognition. His current situation is leaving him dissatisfied. He feels he needs to make friends with those who hold the same high standards he does. Wants to stand out as someone at the top of his class and be admired by others. He needs to feel in control which makes it difficult to give of himself to another person. He feels isolated and alone but refuses to appear weak and continues to be emotionally distant from others in order to keep his attitude of superiority. "
Your Restrained Characteristics
Open and emotionally involved in relationships and easily finds satisfaction through sexual activity.
Current situations force him into compromise and placing his own hopes and desires on hold for the time being.
Current situations force him into compromise and placing his own hopes and desires on hold for the time being.
Your Desired Objective
"Has a strong desire to contribute and influence others, but it can make him restless. He is driven by his desires and hopes. Enjoys a wide range of activities, but he may spread himself to thin taking on too much."
Your Actual Problem
"Fears he will be held back from achieving things he really wants, leading him to search endlessly for satisfaction and become involved in activities which are pointless."
Your Actual Problem #2
"Feeling unimportant in this current situation, and is looking for different conditions where he will be able to better prove his worth and importance."
Huh.
Post by: Lectorog on April 19, 2013, 02:13:18 pm
Post by: Cecilff2 on April 19, 2013, 02:39:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 19, 2013, 02:58:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not even close. If it's close it's because it's too vague as to be any use, it would apply to everyone.
Post by: misko27 on April 19, 2013, 03:00:33 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 19, 2013, 04:45:49 pm
"Struggles to make his demands clear, but feels ignored. Feels resentful, but acts as if he doesn't care, doing what is necessary to keep peace."
"Struggles to make his demands clear, but feels ignored. Feels resentful, but acts as if he doesn't care, doing what is necessary to keep peace."
"Struggles to make his demands clear, but feels ignored. Feels resentful, but acts as if he doesn't care, doing what is necessary to keep peace."
o_O
Honestly this one kind of sucks.
Post by: Vector on April 19, 2013, 04:53:35 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well... honestly... other than the objectives/actual problems part, that is pretty unexpectedly accurate.
Post by: Solifuge on April 19, 2013, 06:56:15 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
All in all, this is a pretty accurate painting of my present emotional state. Even if it's just randomly generated and vague-enough-to-generally-work, it's a good tool for self-reflection. Much like horoscopes and such.
These are some things I agree with about my results:
- Seeking change, adventure, and new experiences are primary motivators for me.
- Inability to work on a project (enforced down-time, or development time) drive me nutters, and can kill my desire to work on things.
- It's been a while since I've had a relationship that wasn't friendship or physical. A lack of an emotional relationship has probably caused stress.
- I admit to having an intelligence bias when dealing with others, and considering what people I want to surround myself with.
- I value my self-control highly, and have caught myself looking down on people who lose self-control.
- I love creating things, and though I try to make them for myself, it's best when others let me know they get something out of it too.
- I tend to charge into things and take life head-on, bringing a lot of energy and focus to bear on one thing at a time.
- I am optimistic, to the point of a strong idealistic streak.
And some things I disagree with about my results:
- I don't think of myself as very critical, judgmental, irritable, or demanding of others.
- I'm plenty impulsive, and am not known for reservations unless the situation requires it of me.
- Physical intimacy alone doesn't do a whole lot for me.
- I'm actually pretty hard to insult.
Post by: King DZA on April 19, 2013, 07:14:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Pretty nifty, I suppose. However, I'm afraid that, in my case at least, these quizzes are completely unreliable. For I can do no wrong (some of my actions at certain times just happen to be less right than others), and am thus exempt from any and all forms of both sin and damnation.
The color one for me was very much Hit & Miss:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on April 19, 2013, 07:19:49 pm
Also, DZA has rather similar results as I did for damnation. Christians FTW.
Could you be a little less awe-inspiringly fearful and a little bit more of a cheater and slanderer? I'm lonely in the Malebolge.
Post by: Xantalos on April 19, 2013, 07:49:07 pm
We three have that in common. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OsYCFOaCbg)Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Pretty nifty, I suppose. However, I'm afraid that, in my case at least, these quizzes are completely unreliable. For I can do no wrong (some of my actions at certain times just happen to be less right than others), and am thus exempt from any and all forms of both sin and damnation.
The color one for me was very much Hit & Miss:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tarran on April 19, 2013, 09:33:24 pm
Spoiler: My color test (click to show/hide)
Accuracy: 54%. Not that good in my opinion. It seems to bunch together the results too much, if you know what I mean. Especially where they don't seem to fit, like conceited and sexual activity, and outgoing and agitation.
Post by: Lagslayer on April 19, 2013, 09:58:34 pm
Spoiler: Color test results (click to show/hide)
In the end, I agree with Loud Whispers in that it seems a bit too vague to mean much.
Post by: Tiruin on April 20, 2013, 06:45:21 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I think the thread focuses more on tests now...
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 26, 2013, 02:49:00 pm
Spoiler: Previous Poll Results (click to show/hide)
It is now time for the Big Five personality test (http://www.outofservice.com/bigfive/), notable for being the only major personality test that has been vetted by empirical science.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MonkeyHead on April 26, 2013, 02:58:41 pm
Spoiler: Analysis of specemin "MonkeyHead" complete! (click to show/hide)
Seems the last 2 categories get me quite well.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 26, 2013, 03:00:28 pm
Spoiler: BIG FIVE, BITCHES! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Scelly9 on April 26, 2013, 03:01:04 pm
Spoiler: Me! (click to show/hide)
Only the second really applies to me...
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 26, 2013, 03:02:23 pm
Conscientiousness: 46
Extraversion: 12
Agreeableness: 10
Neuroticism: 90
Yep, as expected.
Post by: Burnt Pies on April 26, 2013, 03:03:48 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on April 26, 2013, 03:23:31 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
*sigh*
Post by: MaximumZero on April 26, 2013, 03:30:54 pm
*gasp* I scored higher than Vector on "Openness to Experience/Intellect"!? What sorcery is this?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
*sigh*
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 26, 2013, 03:32:24 pm
Post by: Vector on April 26, 2013, 03:35:09 pm
*gasp* I scored higher than Vector on "Openness to Experience/Intellect"!? What sorcery is this?
Haha, I felt that it was bad of me to talk myself up too much on all the best aspects. So there were a couple where I was slightly less in agreement than the others, and I put down 4's.
. . . ._.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 26, 2013, 03:35:25 pm
The point, my dear goddess of numbers, is to be honest. You're not supposed to worry about whether or not you're talking yourself up. Go back and do it right. :P*gasp* I scored higher than Vector on "Openness to Experience/Intellect"!? What sorcery is this?
Haha, I felt that it was bad of me to talk myself up too much on all the best aspects. So there were a couple where I was slightly less in agreement than the others, and I put down 4's.
. . . ._.
Post by: Vector on April 26, 2013, 03:36:38 pm
(On the other hand, my conscientiousness score has dropped drastically)
Post by: sjm9876 on April 26, 2013, 03:40:47 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Only real disagreement is the first there.
Post by: Kansa on April 26, 2013, 03:42:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 26, 2013, 03:44:15 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I feel content.
Post by: Diablous on April 26, 2013, 03:53:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Seems accurate, but I figured my openness and neuroticism would be higher.
Post by: Dutchling on April 26, 2013, 04:10:30 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
There is truth in this I guess.
Post by: Wolfeyez on April 26, 2013, 04:40:40 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lagslayer on April 26, 2013, 05:04:17 pm
Spoiler: My big 5 (click to show/hide)
Post by: Guardian G.I. on April 26, 2013, 05:20:20 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: ggamer on April 26, 2013, 06:57:04 pm
Spoiler: Hmmm... (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on April 26, 2013, 06:58:54 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Still, from that you'd think I have no positive qualities. I do! Like, um...
Post by: Tarran on April 26, 2013, 07:15:53 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hey! My desk isn't THAT messy! :P
Also, holy crap a 1 on Extraversion? Even though I classify myself as reclusive, isn't that a little extreme? :o
Post by: Zangi on April 26, 2013, 08:04:49 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Otherwise, seems pretty accurate.
EDIT: In the future, if I survive to be a senior citizen, I will be classified as an Arch-Conservative of the times.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 26, 2013, 08:44:31 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No real surprises there; I've taken the Big Five plenty of times before.
Post by: Hanslanda on April 26, 2013, 08:49:17 pm
Spoiler: Color Test (click to show/hide)
Which is frighteningly accurate.
Spoiler: Big Five (click to show/hide)
I disagree with openness, but the rest is pretty accurate.
Post by: Tiruin on April 26, 2013, 08:53:42 pm
Spoiler: Anyway, this seems mostly correct (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lectorog on April 26, 2013, 09:21:30 pm
You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The agreeableness is pretty conflicting for me; I'm usually very polite and friendly, and like many people, but I find many things to hate in everyone, though I almost never share them.
Post by: mcclay on April 26, 2013, 09:31:26 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on April 26, 2013, 09:50:39 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No surprises here.
Post by: Vector on April 26, 2013, 10:05:19 pm
EDIT: In the future, if I survive to be a senior citizen, I will be classified as an Arch-Conservative of the times.
N-Nikov? Is that you? How's the missus?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 26, 2013, 10:06:00 pm
She knows too much. Cut the line.EDIT: In the future, if I survive to be a senior citizen, I will be classified as an Arch-Conservative of the times.
N-Nikov? Is that you? How's the missus?
Post by: Xantalos on April 26, 2013, 10:29:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: da_nang on April 27, 2013, 12:08:04 am
Spoiler: Biggie Fivey (click to show/hide)
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on April 27, 2013, 09:23:05 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah. Seems about right.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 27, 2013, 06:34:12 pm
I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 27, 2013, 06:38:49 pm
/me is awkwardly jerked into a fisticuffs pose, as if by some ethereal force.I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on April 27, 2013, 06:48:42 pm
Post by: Wolfeyez on April 27, 2013, 07:00:45 pm
/me hides behind MaximumZero and giggles./me is awkwardly jerked into a fisticuffs pose, as if by some ethereal force.I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
Post by: Scelly9 on April 27, 2013, 09:33:05 pm
/me Hides behind greatorder and giggles./me Hides behind Wolfeyez and giggles/me hides behind MaximumZero and giggles./me is awkwardly jerked into a fisticuffs pose, as if by some ethereal force.I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 27, 2013, 09:54:43 pm
/me chuckles.
Just according to keikaku.
Post by: misko27 on April 27, 2013, 10:38:15 pm
/me prods the combatants, and begins taking bets/me Hides behind greatorder and giggles./me Hides behind Wolfeyez and giggles/me hides behind MaximumZero and giggles./me is awkwardly jerked into a fisticuffs pose, as if by some ethereal force.I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
[/m]
[/m]
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT. IT'S THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY FOLKS, ONE TIME ONLY. DON'T WANT TO MISS THIS, HURRY ON DOWN. POPCORN 2 PERCENT OFF, FREE DRINK WITH EVERY PURCHASE. COME AND PLACE YOUR BETS BEFORE FIRST BLOOD AND GET THIS COMMEMORATIVE T-SHIRT!
*t-shirt says "I saw time-clones fighting, and it was AWESOME"*
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 28, 2013, 02:41:34 am
Post by: misko27 on April 28, 2013, 09:15:21 am
Post by: gourd on April 28, 2013, 10:55:52 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So basically I am the most neutral person in existence...
Post by: Jervill on April 28, 2013, 10:59:52 am
Post by: AlmightyOne on April 28, 2013, 12:40:46 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on April 28, 2013, 07:12:47 pm
/me laughs and begins promoting one side or the other/me prods the combatants, and begins taking bets/me Hides behind greatorder and giggles./me Hides behind Wolfeyez and giggles/me hides behind MaximumZero and giggles./me is awkwardly jerked into a fisticuffs pose, as if by some ethereal force.I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
[/m]
[/m]
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT. IT'S THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY FOLKS, ONE TIME ONLY. DON'T WANT TO MISS THIS, HURRY ON DOWN. POPCORN 2 PERCENT OFF, FREE DRINK WITH EVERY PURCHASE. COME AND PLACE YOUR BETS BEFORE FIRST BLOOD AND GET THIS COMMEMORATIVE T-SHIRT!
*t-shirt says "I saw time-clones fighting, and it was AWESOME"*
Timeclones betting on fighting timeclones. Hehe.
Post by: Tiruin on April 28, 2013, 08:54:34 pm
It is glorious.
* Tiruin then wishes there was some kind of survey-ish thing which would try to poke at these kinds of points.
Because it all seems it's like MetalSlimeHunt vs. Everyone else :P
Post by: MaximumZero on April 28, 2013, 09:52:45 pm
Gasp! We're all timeclones!/me laughs and begins promoting one side or the other/me prods the combatants, and begins taking bets/me Hides behind greatorder and giggles./me Hides behind Wolfeyez and giggles/me hides behind MaximumZero and giggles./me is awkwardly jerked into a fisticuffs pose, as if by some ethereal force.I did. Got a problem with that?You are extremely outgoing, social, and energetic. (Your percentile: 83)Who let you in here.
You tend to consider the feelings of others. (Your percentile: 79)
/me assumes fisticuffs pose.
[/m]
[/m]
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT. IT'S THE FIGHT OF THE CENTURY FOLKS, ONE TIME ONLY. DON'T WANT TO MISS THIS, HURRY ON DOWN. POPCORN 2 PERCENT OFF, FREE DRINK WITH EVERY PURCHASE. COME AND PLACE YOUR BETS BEFORE FIRST BLOOD AND GET THIS COMMEMORATIVE T-SHIRT!
*t-shirt says "I saw time-clones fighting, and it was AWESOME"*
Timeclones betting on fighting timeclones. Hehe.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 28, 2013, 10:45:04 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on April 28, 2013, 10:49:25 pm
Quote
Interpretation
We would expect you to be a happy, well-balanced person who likes people and is liked by others. You question whether many conventional views on morality are valid under all circumstances.
Men: Do we detect a sense of chivalry and idealism under the sophistication?
Well, that's pretty much spot-on.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2013, 10:49:56 pm
For the record, I thought Little John was least immoral, Marion second-best, followed by the Sheriff and then Robin. I certainly respect truth, but I don't make friends easily. I'm also, I think, more hardheaded than this would show.
I wonder what I get if I put in the opposite:
"We think you are unhappy, although you probably will not admit it. As a ruthless authoritarian you are as moral as it suits you and no more. You do not apply the same rules to men as you do to women."
Post by: kaijyuu on April 28, 2013, 10:51:54 pm
Quote
Maid MarionChivalry? Bah! Respect for everyone? Sure!
Little John
Robin Hood
The Sheriff
We would expect you to be a happy, well-balanced person who likes people and is liked by others. You question whether many conventional views on morality are valid under all circumstances.
Men: Do we detect a sense of chivalry and idealism under the sophistication?
Problems I have with the test:
1) Maid Marion doesn't actually do anything (she only reacts to what other people do), so it's impossible to judge her with any reasonable degree of accuracy. I assumed her naive, manipulated, and submissive, but that's far from the only interpretation.
2) Little John's motivations are very important in judging him, here. If he's an opportunist who's manipulating Marion, he's on the same level as Robin, if not worse. If he honestly cares for her, then it's a different story. I assumed somewhere inbetween.
I sense a not insignificant tinge of assuming that "men act, women react" in relationships on the part of the test creator. Though it's also possible that the Main Point of this test had to do with Robin's reaction ("hey, let's burn down this stupid assumption that men can have sex whenever they want and women can't"), in which case it's more forgivable.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2013, 10:55:25 pm
I think the problem here is that it's not using enough axes to measure someone's morality, and it's using the ones it has very blurrily. At the very least I'd want to see- since this is a Robin Hood story- something about taking from the rich and giving to the poor, that is, the morality of inequality and existing institutions and rules, which I'm not seeing.
But eh, this isn't scientific.
Here's another morality test I found here (http://www.pa.msu.edu/~aaronson/alitest/aintro.html) and am starting now...
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 28, 2013, 11:03:06 pm
Quote
You are essentially a contented person, even if you consider yourself a little superior. You are moral by your own standards, for you believe that morality is what best suits the occasion.
Men: You are sexually uninhibited, more romantic than you may appear, and more dependent on the approval of others than you care to admit.
kaijyuu, I'm not sure you're correct. Everyone in the story makes essentially one decision. Marion does not merely react, anymore than anyone else does. By that standard, everyone except the Sheriff is simply reacting - he is, after all, the only initiator. What's important is that each makes a decision.
Like with anything of this sort, of course, how someone interprets what they read says more about them than about the story. ;)
The sheriff is undoubtedly bad, in a petty and selfish way. But Marion willingly made a sacrifice to save those she cared about. Robin Hood, though? He essentially betrayed the person who loved him, and whom he supposedly loved, for doing what needed to be done to save him. The sheriff was bad, but the things he did ran nowhere as deep as that. Little John's actions are the hardest to interpret, but he defended the person who did the right thing against a friend who was out of order, and carried through on his word.
I thought, overall, it was pretty interesting. I'd also like to see the interpretations of others, since I'm sure it will reveal even more than the summaries we received at the end.
Post by: kaijyuu on April 28, 2013, 11:06:31 pm
As for Little John, I'd love to see what the test creator would have him do if Marion rejected him saying "I like you as a friend." If he exploded saying he "deserved" something from her after defending her, then he's as horrible as the rest. If not, he's a pretty good guy.
Post by: Tarran on April 28, 2013, 11:08:27 pm
Quote
You are fairly broadminded romantic and reasonably contented. You value kindness greatly and try to live by your ideals. You do not conceal from yourself, or from others, your strong need for security, which may be either emotional or material.Top: Possibly true.
Men: Perhaps you tend to idealize women and credit them with virtues they don't possess.
Bottom: Only somewhat true when I do not get the chance to think things through.
For reference, I chose jmrs. I believe that John didn't do anything really bad (unless I skipped over something?), Marion did betray Robin, but in the name of love, Robin has some right to feel upset, but not as much as in the story, and the Sheriff to me seemed very corrupt, at best.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2013, 11:10:34 pm
Little John-Marion-Sheriff-Robin Hood (it's bad to cheat on your lover, but much much worse to abandon them, and least bad to pick up the pieces?);
Little John-Marion-Robin Hood-Sheriff (hey, cheating is bad and being a jerk about it, while bad, is not the worst);
Marion-Little John-Sheriff-Robin Hood (You gotta grit your teeth and do what you gotta do to save your SO, and that needs to be respected);
Marion-Little John-Robin Hood-Sheriff (I'm not really sure this makes all that much sense-cheating is least bad, but reacting way out of proportion to it is not as bad as one would think?)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 28, 2013, 11:11:38 pm
Mmm... fair enough, Gryph.That takes it a bit too grey. On a judgment test like this you have to have clearly defined enough areas for each character to inhabit, or everyone falls into a morally equal category and whatever judgment you end up with is (more) meaningless.
As for Little John, I'd love to see what the test creator would have him do if Marion rejected him saying "I like you as a friend." If he exploded saying he "deserved" something from her after defending her, then he's as horrible as the rest. If not, he's a pretty good guy.
I had this exact problem with Maid Marion and Little John, who I see as being mostly morally equal. I ultimately rated Little John above Maid Marion, as she did betray Robin Hood's trust even if it was for a good reason. Even so, it's only the most minor of differences.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2013, 11:22:35 pm
Post by: Zangi on April 28, 2013, 11:23:16 pm
Quote
MJSRFirst part, yea, I think that fits...
You are essentially a contented person, even if you consider yourself a little superior. You are moral by your own standards, for you believe that morality is what best suits the occasion.
Men: You are sexually uninhibited, more romantic than you may appear, and more dependent on the approval of others than you care to admit.
Personally, I do not see Marion's action as an 'act of betrayal'... but one of self-sacrifice/love. Robin Hood in this scenario is being a total douchebag, putting all the blame on the wrong person because his 'love' has now been sullied / his perception of her has been shattered.
Post by: freeformschooler on April 28, 2013, 11:24:02 pm
Quote
Men: We find it hard to imagine you leading a full, happy life. The warmth and give-and-take of love are not for you. Your sex life is ringed with unreality, and you neither understand nor appreciate women.
Quote
Women: If you really believe this is the right order, you baffle us completely.
Because that's how gender works.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2013, 11:26:06 pm
I think that's sort of the problem with a test like this: it presents all those possibilities as legitimate moral judgements, even if bad ones. It's not that hard to form a more objective pool of three or four choices that are morally consistent according to most standards (though I suppose we could find a wackier, Randroid judgement that remains consistent on its own terms) which, because those are more objective, say much less about the person taking them. By inputting in Marion-Little John-Sheriff-Robin Hood...I may be more romantic than I appear, and more dependent on the approval of others than I care to admit (true the both), but sexually uninhibited? My inner Puritan starts screaming a blue streak whenever I kiss a girl on the cheek down here in Brazil (as one normally does in greeting), unless I'm drunk (in which case, kisses for all, and one of these days I'll end up kissing a girl on the mouth and carry the regret for life).
Post by: GlyphGryph on April 28, 2013, 11:34:55 pm
My tried and true strategy is to peg it with tennis balls until it climbs out of the tree on it's own.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2013, 11:38:35 pm
Alignment test, I fail right on question one. Answer: None of the Above.
My tried and true strategy is to peg it with tennis balls until it climbs out of the tree on it's own.
Here's a version on OKCupid, if you are so inclined. (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/the-alignment-test-1) Just make sure you tell it to just show you the results without signing up. I got Neutral Good on this one, too. Scored slightly more on the chaotic than lawful side, but only slightly.
Post by: Cheeetar on April 28, 2013, 11:52:13 pm
Quote
You are conventional and puritanical.
Men: You moralize and see women as a great conspiracy against man, with sex as their principal weapon. You are missing a great deal in life.
I don't really find this accurate, but I don't suppose I expected it to be.
Post by: Vector on April 28, 2013, 11:54:36 pm
Quote
You are fairly broadminded romantic and reasonably contented. You value kindness greatly and try to live by your ideals. You do not conceal from yourself, or from others, your strong need for security, which may be either emotional or material.
Women: Your experiences of men have not all been happy, perhaps because you hope for a little too much?
Quote
You are fairly broadminded romantic and reasonably contented. You value kindness greatly and try to live by your ideals. You do not conceal from yourself, or from others, your strong need for security, which may be either emotional or material.
Men: Perhaps you tend to idealize women and credit them with virtues they don't possess.
Uh... Little John, Marion, Robin Hood, Sheriff.
Little John, to the best of my understanding, did nothing wrong--he wasn't in the green on the morality meter, but he didn't do anything immoral either. Marion did something I strongly disagree with for selfless reasons. Robin Hood did something I strongly disagree with for understandable reasons. Sheriff did something I strongly disagree with for selfish reasons. Everyone's in the red! It was an everyone's-in-the-red sort of scenario.
What, are they upset that I ranked Marion and Robin too high? I don't really get it. In my point of view, Little John and Robin Hood would have probably gotten out some other way, possible with the help of Will Scarlet and Friar Tuck or the entire rest of the merry band of men, so Marion acted needlessly. I feel like both Robin and Marion are about the same, because they both hold stupid opinions for emotional reasons.
EDIT: . . . Also, I'm apparently in the 96th percentile on good for the OK Cupid test ;_; Hahahahahhaah-sob. Lawful good, 26th percentile on chaotic.
Post by: Cthulhu on April 28, 2013, 11:57:19 pm
In reality I picked Maid Marian, Little John, and then Robin Hood and the Sheriff are about the same, though I'm beginning to get what they meant about chivalry and idealism. Putting the sheriff's exploitation as automatically worse than Robin Hood's meltdown feels a bit like putting the woman's sexuality on a pedestal. If he'd done any other form of exploitation, would he still be worse? Maid Marian and Little John are similar too, I figure Little John is about neutral. Maid Marian was honest about what she did.
I'm Neutral Good.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 29, 2013, 12:02:51 am
In my point of view, Little John and Robin Hood would have probably gotten out some other way, possible with the help of Will Scarlet and Friar Tuck or the entire rest of the merry band of men, so Marion acted needlessly.Yeah, that's the second big problem with the test. Expecting that the Sheriff could hold Little John and Robin Hood for any meaningful period of time is kind of silly. Would be interesting to see if people would react differently if Marion spends the night with the Sheriff, only for Robin Hood and Little John to have broken out hours ago anyway.
Post by: freeformschooler on April 29, 2013, 12:04:27 am
Post by: Vector on April 29, 2013, 12:05:13 am
Actually, I think I'd rank Robin Hood, Little John, Marion, then Sheriff in that case, assuming Little John just went "Uh, I'm going to let you kill me for the sake of mah friend." I'm really not into the whole emotional manipulation or imprisonment thing, which is why I put Sheriff last.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2013, 12:23:58 am
Oh God, I've been visualizing this entire scenario with the Disney characters unintentionally. That makes it about 10x worse.You are terrible and should feel terrible. I have good memories of that movie, even though almost all the animation was ripped from other Disney movies.
Incidentally, I went through a few test runs of it, and it's pretty much locked into a specific set of objective moral codes, despite several of the actions being at least somewhat grey. In fact, the only one who was without question in the wrong was the Sheriff. Unless you're a sociopath or something.
I also did the alignment one.
Spoiler: True Neutral (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaijyuu on April 29, 2013, 12:29:40 am
Physical violence isn't the only way rape can occur. Any sort of forcing someone into sex is rape, period. That includes threatening a third party.
The only way I can see her not getting raped in this scenario is if you assume that the Sheriff was justified in imprisoning Robin Hood. I presume you're on the side of Robin Hood here when it comes to that. If you're some wacko libertarian who sees Robin Hood as a villain protagonist since he steals from the rich to give to the poor, then maybe you have a case for Marion seducing the Sheriff (but even in that case it's explicitly pointed out in the text that he offered the deal to her, at which point her worst crime is accepting an offer to bribe the Sheriff).
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on April 29, 2013, 12:34:08 am
Different, but more or less the same.
Quote
You are essentially a contented person, even if you consider yourself a little superior. You are moral by your own standards, for you believe that morality is what best suits the occasion.
Men: You are sexually uninhibited, more romantic than you may appear, and more dependent on the approval of others than you care to admit.
I don't usually pull the moral indignation card, but uh... Marion got raped, people. She did nothing wrong.No see, she... uh. I dunno.
Physical violence isn't the only way rape can occur. Any sort of forcing someone into sex is rape, period. That includes threatening a third party.
The only way I can see her not getting raped in this scenario is if you assume that the Sheriff was justified in imprisoning Robin Hood. I presume you're on the side of Robin Hood here when it comes to that. If you're some wacko libertarian who sees Robin Hood as a villain protagonist since he steals from the rich to give to the poor, then maybe you have a case for Marion seducing the Sheriff (but even in that case it's explicitly pointed out in the text that he offered the deal to her, at which point her worst crime is accepting an offer to bribe the Sheriff).
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 29, 2013, 12:35:30 am
I don't usually pull the moral indignation card, but uh... Marion got raped, people. She did nothing wrong.The issue comes in with what you consider to be threatening. The Sheriff has already imprisoned Robin Hood. There's no active threat to him in that. He's offering to let him out, not placing a threat against him. You could consider it a passive threat, but it's hard to say.
Physical violence isn't the only way rape can occur. Any sort of forcing someone into sex is rape, period. That includes threatening a third party.
The only way I can see her not getting raped in this scenario is if you assume that the Sheriff was justified in imprisoning Robin Hood. I presume you're on the side of Robin Hood here when it comes to that. If you're some wacko libertarian who sees Robin Hood as a villain protagonist since he steals from the rich to give to the poor, then maybe you have a case for Marion seducing the Sheriff (but even in that case it's explicitly pointed out in the text that he offered the deal to her, at which point her worst crime is accepting an offer to bribe the Sheriff).
Now, as for the imprisonment, capturing Robin hood is the Sheriff's damned job. It isn't really right, but it isn't a malicious act either. If he didn't capture thieves he'd be a bad Sheriff.
Post by: Vector on April 29, 2013, 12:37:21 am
I think her error was a failure to be creative--she worked with Evil when there were a lot of other ways out of the predicament. If it weren't Marion, I might have felt differently about it, but Maid Marion is cool and this does not make a very good story.
Actually, change it to Lancelot, King Arthur, Guenevere, and Mordred, and I think I'd have very different feelings. Map Lancelot to Robin Hood, Arthur to Little John, Guenevere to Maid Marion, Mordred to the Sheriff and I'd probably do Guenevere, Arthur, Lancelot, Mordred.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2013, 12:39:10 am
Quote
The Sheriff agreed to release them only if Maid Marion spent the night with him. To this she agreed.
Sheriff was a scumbag who used her friends as leverage, but it was still a choice. She could have walked away (and, this being Robin Hood, she would likely have arranged a jailbreak within the week).
I wouldn't term it seduction, either. If she came on to him and then drugged his wine or knocked him over the head, sure. In the scenario as presented it was a clear exchange between Marion and the Sheriff, sexual favors for the release of a pair of men who may or may not have been lawfully imprisoned. I'm not making a value judgement (apart from the Sheriff being slime), merely an observation. As Vector said, the situation was presented as a binary choice when it was not, and Marion is (to say the least) unlikely to resort to something like this.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 29, 2013, 12:40:40 am
(apart from the Sheriff being slime)I am not!
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 29, 2013, 12:43:35 am
Kai, read it again.QuoteThe Sheriff agreed to release them only if Maid Marion spent the night with him. To this she agreed.
Sheriff was a scumbag who used her friends as leverage, but it was still a choice. She could have walked away (and, this being Robin Hood, she would likely have arranged a jailbreak within the week).
I wouldn't term it seduction, either. If she came on to him and then drugged his wine or knocked him over the head, sure. In the scenario as presented it was a clear exchange between Marion and the Sheriff, sexual favors for the release of a pair of men who may or may not have been lawfully imprisoned. I'm not making a value judgement (apart from the Sheriff being slime), merely an observation. As Vector said, the situation was presented as a binary choice when it was not, and Marion is (to say the least) unlikely to resort to something like this.
Exactly. Marion agreed to the deal, and since it's the sheriff's job to capture thieves, she's the one offering the bribe in this case, not the sheriff raping her.
Sure, rape is technically "nonconsensual sex" between partners, but in this case, she chose it herself to keep the sheriff from doing his job.
And now that I bring up nonconsensual, she agreed to it. In short, she consented to it by agreeing to the deal. So, it's not rape.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2013, 12:44:04 am
Slime, lowercase synonym for scum. Not Slime, mob, or Slime Hunting, profession. Or Street Life Intelligence and Money is Everything or a term referring to a friend, as UrbanDictionary apparently thinks.(apart from the Sheriff being slime)I am not!
Post by: Cthulhu on April 29, 2013, 12:50:28 am
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2013, 12:52:33 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 29, 2013, 01:10:03 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: sjm9876 on April 29, 2013, 01:59:03 am
Spoiler: alignment (click to show/hide)
Post by: Powder Miner on April 29, 2013, 02:15:26 am
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 29, 2013, 02:31:12 am
Even though I answered that I'd never tell my GF I had a great kissing session with a hottie who threw up, read the gf's journal for juicy secrets and ignore the person crying over the toothpaste aisle.
I was 51% Good, and 60% Lawful, btw.
Post by: scriver on April 29, 2013, 02:52:22 am
I don't really agree with the year's definition of Lawful/Chaos though.
Post by: Skyrunner on April 29, 2013, 02:57:34 am
Dutchling got it right ;D
Post by: Aptus on April 29, 2013, 05:00:48 am
You are 55.6% Good.
You are 23.1% Lawful.
Neutral good party in Dis yeah? Marion is invited, but Robin Hood can go sit in a pond somewhere.
Post by: Dutchling on April 29, 2013, 06:29:23 am
You are 30.6% Good.
You are 2.6% Lawful.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm okay with this :v
Neutral Good: 50% Good, 56% ChaoticWhat'd I do? ???
Dutchling got it right ;D
Post by: Tiruin on April 29, 2013, 08:51:01 am
Spoiler: Goodness. (click to show/hide)
On this test... (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/the-alignment-test-1)
I'm Lawful Good...Somehow I chose Neutral in most things? O_o
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit: checked the link to the Wizards of the Coast thing: Scored Neutral Good...
...
I'm really thinking some questions are based on local practices more than not.
Post by: Jervill on April 29, 2013, 09:05:52 am
You are 50% Good.
You are 12.8% Lawful.
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 09:15:38 am
Little john seems scoundrelish, but I can understand Robin's rage. the Sheriff is a good person in the sense that I'm a good person, they do what they are expected when they cheat and lie
Spoiler: Hmph (click to show/hide)
Lawful Evil. Not a shock.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2013, 09:17:52 am
Post by: Haspen on April 29, 2013, 09:30:44 am
Quote
Lawful-Neutral
46% Good, 40% Chaotic
I thought I will be Lawful-Evil, but oh well :P
Post by: Leatra on April 29, 2013, 09:43:04 am
52% Good, 66% Chaotic
Eh, that's what I was expecting.
You Good and Evil types should stop fighting for an ideal and think for yourselves! You Lawful fellas should stop being controlled by the laws that are created by other people who are very different from you! And you True Neutral people... yeah I'm okay with you guys.
See you in Limbo.
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 29, 2013, 10:01:08 am
True/Pure Neutral
50% Good, 48% Chaotic
WotC Test:
Neutral Good
Finally, something that reflects my attitude.
Post by: Zangi on April 29, 2013, 10:10:12 am
Chaotic-Neutral
48% Good, 68% Chaotic
Post by: MaximumZero on April 29, 2013, 10:17:15 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on April 29, 2013, 10:19:54 am
Tiruin's Test:Wait whaa? XD
True/Pure Neutral
50% Good, 48% Chaotic
WotC Test:
Neutral Good
Finally, something that reflects my attitude.
It says 90 - 40...so I'm 130%!Well, this is right about me...Spoiler: Goodness. (click to show/hide)
On this test... (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/the-alignment-test-1)
I'm Lawful Good...Somehow I chose Neutral in most things? O_oThere must be something up?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit: checked the link to the Wizards of the Coast thing: Scored Neutral Good...
...
I'm really thinking some questions are based on local practices more than not.
Strangely, that is what it came up with. Really.
Post by: Trapezohedron on April 29, 2013, 10:42:06 am
Post by: Leafsnail on April 29, 2013, 10:58:40 am
Quote
We would expect you to be a happy, well-balanced person who likes people and is liked by others. You question whether many conventional views on morality are valid under all circumstances.The sheriff was clearly exploitative, and in addition failed in his duty as a member of law enforcement (being prepared to let dangerous thieves go in return for personal gratification, or imprisoning people he knew weren't dangerous). That puts him dead last.
Men: Do we detect a sense of chivalry and idealism under the sophistication?
Robin's reaction is to some degree understandable, but he failed to empathize with Marion (someone he supposedly loved) at all, and attacked her while she down for no good reason. This puts him second last.
Brother John was correct in defending Marion, but professing his love at that time (when emotions were running high and Marion was clearly in a vulnerable state) was inappropriate. He should have attempted to calm the situation rather than breaking it right up. His actions are a mixture of right and wrong so that puts him second.
Marion clearly did what she did for selfless reasons, and did not lie about it afterwards. I do not view her actions as morally wrong, so she comes first.
For the sake of argument let's assume that the Merry Men and the law are both morally neutral in this case (the story isn't about whether thievery is right or whatever), and also that Little John and Robin Hood would actually stay in jail if the deal weren't made
I think her error was a failure to be creative--she worked with Evil when there were a lot of other ways out of the predicament. If it weren't Marion, I might have felt differently about it, but Maid Marion is cool and this does not make a very good story.You're meant to "Forget any preconceived ideas you may about them" for the purposes of this test - I do think it is confused by using these names.
Actually, change it to Lancelot, King Arthur, Guenevere, and Mordred, and I think I'd have very different feelings. Map Lancelot to Robin Hood, Arthur to Little John, Guenevere to Maid Marion, Mordred to the Sheriff and I'd probably do Guenevere, Arthur, Lancelot, Mordred.
e: Neutral-Good
90% Good, 52% Chaotic
Seems about right, but I feel like "lawful" has two different dimensions:
1. "Laws are a thing that are necessary/ good for society" - yes
2. "Laws are a thing that should not be challenged if they are wrong" - no
Post by: sjm9876 on April 29, 2013, 11:19:02 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No surprises here.
Post by: Lagslayer on April 29, 2013, 11:36:06 am
Spoiler: http://www.pa.msu.edu/~aaronson/alitest/aintro.html (click to show/hide)
I didn't take the OKcupid test because I didn't want to make an account.
Post by: Cthulhu on April 29, 2013, 11:43:46 am
All you Lawful Good and Neutral Good people need to get some enlightened self-interest. True Neutral's where it's at. :P
I have lots of enlightened self-interest, and plenty of altruism left over.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 29, 2013, 11:55:09 am
Post by: Ameablable on April 29, 2013, 01:58:39 pm
You are 17.9% Lawful.
Spoiler: other results (click to show/hide)
WOOOOOOOOOOOT! im Gandalf and Frodo and Indiana Jones and Luke Skywalker and Harry Potter!
used this site: http://www.pa.msu.edu/~aaronson/alitest/aintro.html
Post by: Zangi on April 29, 2013, 03:12:07 pm
Didn't have to sign up to get the results. That is the problem with fine print I suppose. The OKcupid questions were not all that great to begin with...I expected it to be a little bit more lawful, but that's about right.Spoiler: http://www.pa.msu.edu/~aaronson/alitest/aintro.html (click to show/hide)
I didn't take the OKcupid test because I didn't want to make an account.
Post by: da_nang on April 29, 2013, 06:10:50 pm
You are 2.6% Lawful.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Blargityblarg on April 29, 2013, 06:19:23 pm
Post by: Lectorog on April 29, 2013, 06:39:03 pm
I had no expectations to begin with. After reading their descriptions, I expected chaotic, probably neutral.
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
I was going to comment on some questions but then I deleted that part.
Switzerland would totally be Lawful Neutral.Any nation would be hard-pressed to not be.
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2013, 07:05:28 pm
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article2.asp?x=dnd/dx20001222x (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article2.asp?x=dnd/dx20001222x)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 07:13:17 pm
You are 15.4% Lawful.
Alignment: True Neutral
Post by: Xantalos on April 29, 2013, 07:15:17 pm
And True Neutral for the other.
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 07:30:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'd also do almost anything to get myself out of trouble, because i must have had a good reason for getting into it in the first place (and i almost never get into any trouble).
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 29, 2013, 07:41:11 pm
I kind of wonder if part of the difference is cultural: D&D is set in your standard fantasy universe, before such ideas as universal human rights. (Not that everyone really believes in them even in these enlightened days, no. But we pretend we do.)
I also think there's a personal discrepency: I believe very deeply in the rule of law; it's far more important than democracy. Despite this, or maybe because of the importance of keeping it pure, I also think it's important to call attention to or outright break bad laws.
Post by: Xantalos on April 29, 2013, 07:42:44 pm
I got Lawful Neutral from the D&D test, instead of Neutral Good.Which is why I got True Neutral on that for such horrors as not defending my country, instead fleeing.
I kind of wonder if part of the difference is cultural: D&D is set in your standard fantasy universe, before such ideas as universal human rights. (Not that everyone really believes in them even in these enlightened days, no. But we pretend we do.)
Post by: Lectorog on April 29, 2013, 07:43:35 pm
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article2.asp?x=dnd/dx20001222x (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article2.asp?x=dnd/dx20001222x)Chaotic Neutral FTW. That's what I make most of my D&D characters.
It's hard to take that test in the character of yourself.
If there's one thing I learned from that test, it's that Social Darwinism really conflicts with the standard D&D world.
Post by: Jervill on April 29, 2013, 08:27:57 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 09:38:26 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm flattered.
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 09:43:19 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 09:47:30 pm
Tried a different one.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article2.asp?x=dnd/dx20001222x (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article2.asp?x=dnd/dx20001222x)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
Chaotic good is the best alignment you can be because it combines a good heart with a free spirit.Oh well that puts it to rest.
Post by: Xantalos on April 29, 2013, 09:52:19 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 29, 2013, 09:56:12 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 09:57:38 pm
Post by: Lectorog on April 29, 2013, 10:03:32 pm
funny thing, it also said that neutral evil was the most dangerous due to lack of honor, variation, and restraints.I tried playing a neutral evil character once. It didn't go well. I killed the prisoner and got in a fight with my teammates and the GM decided to never play that campaign again.
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on April 29, 2013, 10:08:00 pm
Spoiler: Neutral Good, (click to show/hide)
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 10:08:36 pm
I tried playing a neutral evil character once. It didn't go well. I killed the prisoner and got in a fight with my teammates and the GM decided to never play that campaign again.i think thats more chaotic evil, since getting in a fight with your teammates obviously does not help you.
i actually float somewhere between
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 29, 2013, 10:15:08 pm
I think Firefly provides one of the better examples of how Good-Neutral-Evil group interaction can work. You've got Simon, Kaylee, and Book on Good, Mal, Zoe, Wash, and Inara on Neutral, Jayne on Evil, and River on Insanity.
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 10:17:37 pm
I think Firefly provides one of the better examples of how Good-Neutral-Evil group interaction can work. You've got Simon, Kaylee, and Book on Good, Mal, Zoe, Wash, and Inara on Neutral, Jayne on Evil, and River on Insanity.dude what are you talking about? who are these ppl? whats a firefly?
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on April 29, 2013, 10:17:39 pm
And more fittingly, a Neutral Good on the DnD test. Also, I'm better than y'alls apparently. So in your faces. :V
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 29, 2013, 10:18:46 pm
/me gives you the glare of hostile intent.I think Firefly provides one of the better examples of how Good-Neutral-Evil group interaction can work. You've got Simon, Kaylee, and Book on Good, Mal, Zoe, Wash, and Inara on Neutral, Jayne on Evil, and River on Insanity.dude what are you talking about? who are these ppl? whats a firefly?
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 10:19:33 pm
Got a Lawful Good, somehow, on the OKcupid test.no, being "good" means you are good for the world. Being "good" is not good for you.
And more fittingly, a Neutral Good on the DnD test. Also, I'm better than y'alls apparently. So in your faces. :V
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on April 29, 2013, 10:32:21 pm
...Got a Lawful Good, somehow, on the OKcupid test.no, being "good" means you are good for the world. Being "good" is not good for you.
And more fittingly, a Neutral Good on the DnD test. Also, I'm better than y'alls apparently. So in your faces. :V
Meh. Never said it was good for me. :P
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 10:43:07 pm
but really, i would like to know. ;Ddude what are you talking about? who are these ppl? whats a firefly?/me gives you the glare of hostile intent.
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 10:48:32 pm
Pretty sure you can be shot for not knowing that.but really, i would like to know. ;Ddude what are you talking about? who are these ppl? whats a firefly?/me gives you the glare of hostile intent.
I mean hell, I barely know any of the internet culture, and I know firefly.
Post by: Scelly9 on April 29, 2013, 10:50:12 pm
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 10:52:06 pm
Pretty sure you can be shot for not knowing that.if you want to know how much i dont know:
I mean hell, I barely know any of the internet culture, and I know firefly.
i just had to look up what "innuendo" meant on the urban dictionary after getting confused about what ppl were talking about on the sad thread, then it made sense...sorta.
so are you guys gonna tell me or not?
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 10:53:33 pm
Google firefly. Find the TV show. Watch.nvm, its answered, thanks
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 11:30:39 pm
I seem to know a shockingly large number of people more ignorant of social interactions then I am. Which is impressive, given me.
Post by: Catsup on April 29, 2013, 11:55:20 pm
I seem to know a shockingly large number of people more ignorant of social interactions then I am. Which is impressive, given me.youre probly normal then, i havent found anyone thats beaten me at not knowing yet.
Post by: misko27 on April 29, 2013, 11:59:19 pm
No, no I'm not.I seem to know a shockingly large number of people more ignorant of social interactions then I am. Which is impressive, given me.youre probly normal then, i havent found anyone thats beaten me at not knowing yet.
But seriously, Even my sister has Aspergers (Which Chrome believes is spelled "Supergrass"). I'm actually a little concerned at not being able to deal with regular people (not that you aren't lovely bay12, but you ARE bay12, so normal is thrown out the window.).
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2013, 12:06:23 am
Post by: Tarran on April 30, 2013, 12:24:02 am
Post by: Xantalos on April 30, 2013, 12:25:58 am
Yeah, and it sucks. It's annoying to have to constantly water yourself again and again to not die.It's worse having an animal body. We have to put organic matter of a very specific kidn inside ourselves and let it go through a highly complex system of breaking it down for nutrients. You guys can just synthesise it.
The maker of Soylent obviously wants to be a planet person.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 30, 2013, 01:00:47 am
Yeah, and it sucks. It's annoying to have to constantly water yourself again and again to not die.♫There's a zombie on your lawn♪♫
Post by: Xantalos on April 30, 2013, 01:03:08 am
...Yeah, and it sucks. It's annoying to have to constantly water yourself again and again to not die.♫There's a zombie on your lawn♪♫
MAXIMUMZERO YOU MAGNIFICENT BASTARD
I never got to complete that game because I didn't want to pay for it. Humph.
How did it end? I nver found out.
Post by: Catsup on April 30, 2013, 01:03:18 am
♫There's a zombie on your lawn♪♫she has a nice voice... <3
Post by: Catsup on April 30, 2013, 01:04:04 am
MAXIMUMZERO YOU MAGNIFICENT BASTARDpretty sure theres a torrent for it out there somewhere, im sure i didnt pay for it...lol
I never got to complete that game because I didn't want to pay for it. Humph.
How did it end? I nver found out.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 30, 2013, 01:12:11 am
Post by: Solifuge on April 30, 2013, 05:42:31 pm
New Test (http://www.talisman.org/quizzes/robin-hood-morality.shtml).
Oh, that's neat. I like story-based personality tests.
Quote from: Robin Hood Morality Test:
Most Moral to Least Moral:
Maid Marion
Little John
The Sheriff
Robin Hood
Interpretation:
You are essentially a contented person, even if you consider yourself a little superior. You are moral by your own standards, for you believe that morality is what best suits the occasion.
Men: You are sexually uninhibited, more romantic than you may appear, and more dependent on the approval of others than you care to admit.
That's pretty darned accurate, surprisingly for such a simple test. Although I wouldn't say I'm a very sexual person, it is a subject I'm open about when it's relevant. And I do have that moral flexibility thing going on too; I try to distance my moral decisions from my personal concerns, when deciding what's situationally right or wrong, though.
I sense a not insignificant tinge of assuming that "men act, women react" in relationships on the part of the test creator. Though it's also possible that the Main Point of this test had to do with Robin's reaction ("hey, let's burn down this stupid assumption that men can have sex whenever they want and women can't"), in which case it's more forgivable.
Yeah, I could see the passivity of Marion. You could say she acted when she approached The Sheriff, and struck a begrudging bargain with him, though.
Post by: Max White on April 30, 2013, 05:47:17 pm
Quote
You are the slightly romantic realist. You respect truth, and are broadminded and flexible. Whether you are a man or a woman you are probably a happy person. You like people and they can readily make friends with you. You are not very adventurous, but this does not bother you.
Post by: penguinofhonor on April 30, 2013, 05:59:21 pm
Quote
We would expect you to be a happy, well-balanced person who likes people and is liked by others. You question whether many conventional views on morality are valid under all circumstances.
Post by: Jervill on April 30, 2013, 06:04:04 pm
MM>LJ>RH>TSQuoteWe would expect you to be a happy, well-balanced person who likes people and is liked by others. You question whether many conventional views on morality are valid under all circumstances.
Same as the honorable penguin, here. Also:
Quote
Men: Do we detect a sense of chivalry and idealism under the sophistication?
Post by: Lectorog on April 30, 2013, 07:39:34 pm
The teammates started it. They were acting hostile after I killed the prisoner so I enacted preemptive defense.I tried playing a neutral evil character once. It didn't go well. I killed the prisoner and got in a fight with my teammates and the GM decided to never play that campaign again.i think thats more chaotic evil, since getting in a fight with your teammates obviously does not help you.
Post by: Catsup on April 30, 2013, 08:33:56 pm
The teammates started it. They were acting hostile after I killed the prisoner so I enacted preemptive defense.yea i think the preemptive defense part was the wrong choice. I mean be on your guard but let the good guys attack you first if its a fight they want (which they probly wont do, considering their alignment).
New Test (http://www.talisman.org/quizzes/robin-hood-morality.shtml).
jrms
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lectorog on April 30, 2013, 08:43:36 pm
yea i think the preemptive defense part was the wrong choice. I mean be on your guard but let the good guys attack you first if its a fight they want (which they probly wont do, considering their alignment).One of the teammates interprets "good" as "eradicate all evil".
Which I feel is relevant to this discussion.
Post by: Owlbread on April 30, 2013, 08:47:02 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
When I tried metalslimehunt's new test about Robin Hood and so forth, this is what I got:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I don't really know what to make of that. Though I wasn't expecting it to be so personal (I feel silly saying that) it is actually pretty much on the ball.
Post by: Catsup on April 30, 2013, 08:48:43 pm
One of the teammates interprets "good" as "eradicate all evil".thats good news for you, let him be a zealot and attack you first, watch as most neutral/lawful characters start turning on him because of his aggression.
Which I feel is relevant to this discussion.
defend yourself of course, killing him if you must, its "self defense" so no one else should turn on you. If you attacked preemptively that causes everyone to turn on you because of your aggression.
Post by: Lectorog on April 30, 2013, 09:07:35 pm
Though I wasn't expecting it to be so personal (I feel silly saying that) it is actually pretty much on the ball.I think a big part of the personal feeling is allowed by the generality of the statements. It's kind of like that previous test with colors, but with a bit more effort to actually make it significant.
thats good news for you, let him be a zealot and attack you first, watch as most neutral/lawful characters start turning on him because of his aggression.I'm sorry, we rarely played by alignment. Apart from my evilness, everyone else just applied alignment as the closest label to fill a space on the character sheet. When in-party fights happen, they're to the death, regardless of alignment.
defend yourself of course, killing him if you must, its "self defense" so no one else should turn on you. If you attacked preemptively that causes everyone to turn on you because of your aggression.
Post by: Owlbread on April 30, 2013, 09:10:24 pm
I think a big part of the personal feeling is allowed by the generality of the statements. It's kind of like that previous test with colors, but with a bit more effort to actually make it significant.
It is a very unscientific method indeed.
Post by: Catsup on April 30, 2013, 09:12:49 pm
I'm sorry, we rarely played by alignment. Apart from my evilness, everyone else just applied alignment as the closest label to fill a space on the character sheet. When in-party fights happen, they're to the death, regardless of alignment.so the "good" guy was just out to get you for the heck of it, geez.
Post by: Lectorog on April 30, 2013, 09:17:52 pm
so the "good" guy was just out to get you for the heck of it, geez.Sorry if I made this seem serious. None of the playing is ever serious, which is why the GM let me choose an evil character. The last fight erupted over someone stealing a wheelbarrow to burn an indestructible house, and resulted in the deaths of two player characters and the annihilation of a town. Everyone involved was of neutral alignment.
Which brings me to a new question:
Is alignment directed from the character's thoughts or actions?
Post by: Catsup on April 30, 2013, 09:29:21 pm
Is alignment directed from the character's thoughts or actions?you need a new gm, you guys are technically supposed to act like what your alignment would have done.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on April 30, 2013, 10:36:33 pm
Spoiler: INTJ (click to show/hide)
On Robin Hood Test I got this:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flying Dice on April 30, 2013, 10:42:25 pm
Honestly, if the entire party doesn't care one bit about alignment, the GM should probably (heh) roll with it. Unless they agreed beforehand that it was going to be heavy on the RP and alignments would be taken seriously. There's no point starting a fight that could potentially kill the fun of the campaign over something like alignment unless it's a problem between one player and the rest of the party. :|Is alignment directed from the character's thoughts or actions?you need a new gm, you guys are technically supposed to act like what your alignment would have done.
Post by: GlyphGryph on May 01, 2013, 02:08:58 pm
Post by: Sigulbard on May 01, 2013, 04:32:56 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 01, 2013, 04:33:51 pm
I want to vote in the poll.What do you think this is, a free country?
Post by: Zrk2 on May 01, 2013, 10:29:36 pm
Post by: misko27 on May 01, 2013, 10:36:17 pm
I know, the fucking commies, always talking about "the constitution" and "liberty".I want to vote in the poll.What do you think this is, a free country?
Post by: Max White on May 01, 2013, 10:37:43 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on May 01, 2013, 10:56:44 pm
Post by: Xantalos on May 01, 2013, 11:40:16 pm
If voting is a cabbage and the voters are the knives that chop up the cabbage into individual pieces, then what we have here is a cabbage locked in a soft room with putty covering everything.
Post by: Tarran on May 02, 2013, 03:57:21 am
I'm pretty sure this is actually a dictatorship, what with Toady and Threetoe calling the shots.Personally, I think this is an anarchy. It's just that Toady and Threetoe have godly powers and the world is being maintained by them is all.
Post by: penguinofhonor on May 02, 2013, 04:20:48 am
Post by: Tarran on May 02, 2013, 06:14:14 am
...Wait, is that a train I see flying 20 degrees off a straight rail and off a bridge?
Post by: MaximumZero on May 02, 2013, 11:04:26 am
Before that, we should have a poll on who can call a poll vote.CHOO CHOO MOTHERFUCKERS.
...Wait, is that a train I see flying 20 degrees off a straight rail and off a bridge?
Post by: Shakerag on May 02, 2013, 12:05:03 pm
Same result, same reaction.New Test (http://www.talisman.org/quizzes/robin-hood-morality.shtml).'You are the slightly romantic realist. You respect truth, and are broadminded and flexible. Whether you are a man or a woman you are probably a happy person. You like people and they can readily make friends with you. You are not very adventurous, but this does not bother you.'
No.
Just... no.
Interestingly, when I went through the survey and responded with how I perceive the morality/honesty of the world in general to be, I got this:
Quote
The Sheriff, Robin Hood, Maid Marion, Little JohnWhich sounds about right to me.
Men: We find it hard to imagine you leading a full, happy life. The warmth and give-and-take of love are not for you. Your sex life is ringed with unreality, and you neither understand nor appreciate women.
Women: If you really believe this is the right order, you baffle us completely.
Post by: Dutchling on May 02, 2013, 12:09:46 pm
"Such an emphatic rejection of ready-made values is probably partly camouflage. You hate to be thought weak or insecure. You value honesty, and abhor hypocrisy.
Men: Women are very much part of you life, and you are - or perhaps would like to be - quite ruthless, both with women and life in general."
???
Post by: Lectorog on May 02, 2013, 06:13:12 pm
you need a new gm, you guys are technically supposed to act like what your alignment would have done.Less than half of the campaigns we run have set rules. Alignment is very low on the list of concerns.
Post by: Lagslayer on May 02, 2013, 06:24:44 pm
Spoiler: Robin Hood Quiz; JMRS (click to show/hide)
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on May 03, 2013, 06:03:21 pm
MSJR.Well, you did list the sheriff as being more moral than John, so... :P
"Such an emphatic rejection of ready-made values is probably partly camouflage. You hate to be thought weak or insecure. You value honesty, and abhor hypocrisy.
Men: Women are very much part of you life, and you are - or perhaps would like to be - quite ruthless, both with women and life in general."
???
Post by: Lectorog on May 03, 2013, 07:36:48 pm
Well, you did list the sheriff as being more moral than John, so... :PIt could be argued that John took advantage of Marion more than the Sheriff did.
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on May 03, 2013, 08:41:08 pm
Ehhh... But that's really just kinda stretching it, all things considered.Well, you did list the sheriff as being more moral than John, so... :PIt could be argued that John took advantage of Marion more than the Sheriff did.
They never tell us anything of John's motivation, is the thing. It's just 'Then Little John led Marion off towards a better life.'
John's just a footnote or just thrown in to bring the character count up to a nice round four, so we can really only judge him by his actions, which are generally moral. :P
But hey, I suppose it would show one's views on relationships if they do believe that to be the case, which fits with the test, I suppose. :-\
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 12, 2013, 07:54:07 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 12, 2013, 08:10:53 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 12, 2013, 08:15:16 pm
That whole post is ridiculous and is, in and of it self, spreading myths about introverts. Introversion is not the same thing as being unable to function in society, nor does it make you a special snowflake. It significantly reminds me of all the people self-diagnosing as having Aspergers so they can excuse their jackassery.Anon really just defined with bias what it was in more detail, one concerned more with their own expressions and thoughts than external things.
Post by: Xantalos on May 12, 2013, 08:31:22 pm
It wasn't really worth the process that made me an introvert, though, considering it gave me more problems than it did to it's 0 benefits.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on May 12, 2013, 09:38:36 pm
1 is especially true. Srsly, the hell does smalltalk even do? It's small, mundane, almost meaningless talking. I could go blow hot air and achieve the same effect, and with less noise.
POST-POST Edit: So while googling "introverts dopamine snesitivity" I found this webpage (http://www.carlkingdom.com/10-myths-about-introverts), which sites an interesting book on the topic of introverts and describes introverts as "people who are over-sensitive to Dopamine, so too much external stimulation overdoses and exhausts them."
It also lists the 10 myths and explanations in the exact same wording as anon's posts. Just sayin'.
Post by: GlyphGryph on May 13, 2013, 12:38:37 pm
Note that I still wouldn't call myself an extrovert - I've certainly adopted a number of extrovert patterns and behaviour, and I'm a lot better off for it. I've also got a pretty malleable personality compared to most, I think. But the things that are true of introverts still generally tend to be true of me - I just think most people can do far better than such crass and simplistic classifications. A lot of behaviours I see coupled with the label "introvert" are terrible behaviours, patterns that don't do the person following them any damn good, and the introversion is an excuse to continue engaging in them, which I find frustrating.
Post by: Haspen on May 13, 2013, 12:49:24 pm
Quote
Little John, Sheriff, Robin, Marion (jsrm)
Interpretation
You are conventional, unimaginative, and something of a prude. It would be surprising if your love life was a roaring success.
Men: You have an old-world authoritarian attitude. One thing is sure: you have some sorry illusions about women.
...
But... but old-world authoritarian is... is good, right? ;_;
Then again, I wanted to put Marion and Robin in the same spot, so meh.
Post by: Xantalos on May 13, 2013, 08:00:05 pm
Magical anon's explanations are pretty true for me, 'cept that whole bit on the dopamine. I never heard of that, I need to go google that.I sometimes do that.
1 is especially true. Srsly, the hell does smalltalk even do? It's small, mundane, almost meaningless talking. I could go blow hot air and achieve the same effect, and with less noise.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 18, 2013, 04:47:01 am
Post by: Hár on May 18, 2013, 05:07:49 am
Well, that's boring.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 18, 2013, 05:16:36 am
Post by: FearfulJesuit on May 18, 2013, 12:03:49 pm
Post by: Hanslanda on May 18, 2013, 12:07:50 pm
I ... fit most of the explanations by the anon, with exceptions being conversation - I disengage my higher brain functions and just talk in order to do social stuff.
It wasn't really worth the process that made me an introvert, though, considering it gave me more problems than it did to it's 0 benefits.
About the same here, except I was very definitely BORN introverted, grew up introverted, and have only recently shed even a few of my introverted habits. At work, when I talk to people, it's all pretty much on a script until they say/I say something interesting, then I actually engage in the conversation, otherwise it's all, "How are you today. Would you like plastic or paper. [Awful/wonderful] weather we're having."
But if I'm with A friend, I'm excitable and talkative and all that jazz. More than two people other than myself in a group makes me uncomfortable, I just want to leave, and yeah, I shut down. I sit there, smile, and wonder what excuses I can make so I can leave. :/
What STD are you? Find out now!
Human Children: Most prevalent and awful of all STDs. :P
Post by: misko27 on May 18, 2013, 07:35:04 pm
What STD are you? Find out now!To the Sig thread Robin!
Post by: RedWarrior0 on May 20, 2013, 02:48:45 am
Post by: Solifuge on May 20, 2013, 04:04:07 am
(Brought to us by Deepak Chopra. Yay?)
Quote
Your scores are Vata: 4 Pitta: 2 Kapha: 4
Based on your results, you are a KAPHA-VATA:
Kapha is the principle of protection, nourishment, and stability. It is associated with the earth element. People with a predominance of Kapha in their nature tend to have a heavier frame, think, and move more leisurely, and are stable. When balanced, it creates calmness, sweetness, and loyalty. When excessive, Kapha can cause weight gain, congestion, and resistance to healthy change.
Vata is the principle of movement and change. It can be identified as the Wind element. People with a predominance of Vata in their nature tend to be thin, light, and quick in our thoughts and actions. Change is a constant part of life. When Vata is balanced, they are creative, enthusiastic, and lively. But if Vata becomes excessive, they may develop anxiety, insomnia, dry skin, or irregular digestion.
Welp... the shoe fits, Mr. Chopra.
Post by: hops on May 20, 2013, 04:12:18 am
Your scores are Vata: 4 Pitta: 1 Kapha: 5
Based on your results, you are a KAPHA-VATA:
Kapha is the principle of protection, nourishment, and stability. It is associated with the earth element. People with a predominance of Kapha in their nature tend to have a heavier frame, think, and move more leisurely, and are stable. When balanced, it creates calmness, sweetness, and loyalty. When excessive, Kapha can cause weight gain, congestion, and resistance to healthy change.
Vata is the principle of movement and change. It can be identified as the Wind element. People with a predominance of Vata in their nature tend to be thin, light, and quick in our thoughts and actions. Change is a constant part of life. When Vata is balanced, they are creative, enthusiastic, and lively. But if Vata becomes excessive, they may develop anxiety, insomnia, dry skin, or irregular digestion.
Post by: Vector on May 20, 2013, 04:17:35 am
Quote
Your scores are Vata: 3 Pitta: 4 Kapha: 3
Based on your results, you are a TRI-DOSHIC:
Vata is the principle of movement and change. It can be identified as the Wind element. People with a predominance of Vata in their nature tend to be thin, light, and quick in our thoughts and actions. Change is a constant part of life. When Vata is balanced, they are creative, enthusiastic, and lively. But if Vata becomes excessive, they may develop anxiety, insomnia, dry skin, or irregular digestion.
Pitta is the principle of transformation represented in our digestion of ideas, sensory experiences, emotions, and food. It is associated with the Fire element. People with a predominance of Pitta in their nature tend to be muscular, smart, and determined. If balanced, a Pitta is warm, intelligent, and a good leader. If out of balance, Pitta can make us critical, irritable, and aggressive.
Kapha is the principle of protection, nourishment, and stability. It is associated with the earth element. People with a predominance of Kapha in their nature tend to have a heavier frame, think, and move more leisurely, and are stable. When balanced, it creates calmness, sweetness, and loyalty. When excessive, Kapha can cause weight gain, congestion, and resistance to healthy change.
Yup. In the middle again.
Post by: Xantalos on May 20, 2013, 04:31:47 am
Quote
Your scores are Vata: 1 Pitta: 5 Kapha: 4Generally this is it.
Based on your results, you are a PITTA-KAPHA:
Pitta is the principle of transformation represented in our digestion of ideas, sensory experiences, emotions, and food. It is associated with the Fire element. People with a predominance of Pitta in their nature tend to be muscular, smart, and determined. If balanced, a Pitta is warm, intelligent, and a good leader. If out of balance, Pitta can make us critical, irritable, and aggressive.
Pitta Characteristics
Mind: Sharp, intellectual, direct, precise, discerning
Body: Medium build, warm, muscular
Skin: Sensitive, flush, acne-prone
Hair: Tendency towards early graying or thinning
Appetite: Strong, can eat just about anything, anytime
Routine: Very precise and organized
Temperament: Passionate, driven, courageous, strong sex drive, good leader
Conversation Style: Speaks to convey a point
Shopping Style: Spends on luxury items
Stress Response: Irritable, tendency to blame others.
Kapha is the principle of protection, nourishment, and stability. It is associated with the earth element. People with a predominance of Kapha in their nature tend to have a heavier frame, think, and move more leisurely, and are stable. When balanced, it creates calmness, sweetness, and loyalty. When excessive, Kapha can cause weight gain, congestion, and resistance to healthy change.
Kapha Characteristics
Mind: Detail orientated, steady, consistent
Body: Sturdy, gains weight easily, has trouble losing it
Skin: Smooth & oily
Hair: Thick, oily
Appetite: Loves to eat but has a slow digestion
Routine: Methodical and sturdy, resistant to change
Temperament: Thoughtful, forgiving, sweet, patient, loving, content, slow moving
Conversation Style: Simple and profound
Shopping Style: Saves
Stress Response: I don’t want to deal with it! Withdrawn
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 20, 2013, 04:34:52 am
Also, it's a shortened version, but well, I can't find the original one. Atheists and the like can still take the quiz, just negate some questions.
Google translate does a decent job, but here's a corrected version. Dutch left, english right.
Spoiler: Translation of the questions (click to show/hide)
The result you get is a graph. Take the first one you see, that one's yours.
It also spits out 4 values.
Quote from: me
External Critique : 2
Relativism : 5
Second Naiveté : 6
Orthodoxy : 2
External critique = Literal unbeliever
Orthodoxy= Literal believer
Relativism= Symbolical unbeliever
Second Naiveté= Symbolical believer
Post by: miauw62 on May 20, 2013, 05:51:54 am
I have:
External Critique: 3
Relativism: 4
Second Naivete: 3
Orthodoxy: 1
Post by: Max White on May 20, 2013, 05:55:48 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 20, 2013, 05:57:31 am
Post by: Max White on May 20, 2013, 06:05:07 am
Also, I didn't exactly 100% understand all of those questions, or most of them for that matter, so I kind of guessed a few. I'm sure it didn't affect my results as much as the region did though!
Quote
External Critique: 5
Relativism: 4
Second Naivete: 4
Orthodoxy: 2
Just for reference, my actual views on the bible are
1. The bible shouldn't be taken literally. Don't be silly.
2. Despite this, there are still moral lessons to be taken from the bible.
3. Despite this, not all lessons from the bible are moral. Taking the entire thing, without discrimination, as a moral guideline is a bad idea and will lead to self contradiction.
Post by: 10ebbor10 on May 20, 2013, 07:01:01 am
I don't see how you think an atheist could do that quiz. I would have to throw out almost all the questions, which kind of renders it moot.The thing has a believer vs unbeliever scale, so well yeah.
Also, Belgian Christians, not dutch.
Post by: Hanslanda on May 20, 2013, 12:53:47 pm
Just for reference, my actual views on the bible are
1. The bible shouldn't be taken literally. Don't be silly.
2. Despite this, there are still moral lessons to be taken from the bible.
3. Despite this, not all lessons from the bible are moral. Taking the entire thing, without discrimination, as a moral guideline is a bad idea and will lead to self contradiction.
As for number three, what's that verse again?
"If a man rapes a woman, he should be forced to pay her father fifty shekels of silver, and be made to wed her for the rest of his life." -Deuteronomy I think.
Reading the Bible and taking it as a flat 'Do this' is a horrible idea and will make you a horrible person. >.> Reading it to try and find lessons of morality will make you a wonderful person, so long as you apply them correctly. If you find yourself doing this:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Thinking that you're being moral, you need to eat shit and die in a fire slowly. As far as I can understand it, the New Testament preaches tolerance and love, not bigotry and hatred... Right?
Also, I can't do that quiz because I'm too Cynic Atheist for it. >.>
Post by: Jelle on May 20, 2013, 05:21:04 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And while dutch, definatly not a christian.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Graknorke on May 20, 2013, 05:36:53 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Knight of Fools on May 20, 2013, 06:05:20 pm
Also, the results aren't well explained.
Post by: RedWarrior0 on May 20, 2013, 06:10:54 pm
Relativism : 5
Second Naiveté : 5
Orthodoxy : 2
I am a symbolic guy who can't make up his mind about being religious or not. So that pretty much describes me well.
Post by: Flying Dice on May 20, 2013, 06:11:12 pm
Relativism : 4
Second Naiveté : 3
Orthodoxy : 1
More or less accurate, I guess.
Post by: aenri on May 22, 2013, 11:57:50 am
Relativism : 5
Second Naiveté : 4
Orthodoxy : 2
I mean, not bad, but pretty similar to FD's and Redwarrior's.
Post by: Jervill on May 22, 2013, 05:15:57 pm
External Critique: 6
Relativism: 3
Second Naivete: 3
Orthodoxy: 1
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2013, 11:25:22 am
Quote
You are most likely a type 5.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w4.
Spoiler: The raw numbers (click to show/hide)
I think the tested even split between 1, 3, and 5 is very accurate, actually... it's what I got the first time I took the exam without having read about the types, about five years ago, and also what I suspected I'd get this time through (without being able to guess what any of the questions corresponded to).
Anyway, here's (http://www.eclecticenergies.com/enneagram/test.php) the exam. The one you want is the classical.
And after you're done, here (http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/descript.asp) are some more detailed type descriptions.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 23, 2013, 11:35:29 am
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2013, 11:43:42 am
Post by: Lectorog on June 23, 2013, 11:49:33 am
Quote
You are most likely a type 9.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 9w1.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Peacemaker? Unexpected. But, reading the description, it makes more sense.
I think this test isn't accurate for assessing personality overall, but provides interesting insight to parts of a personality.
Post by: scriver on June 23, 2013, 11:54:56 am
Quote
You are most likely a type 4.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 4w5 or 5w4.
I also had a strongish wing towards 6, it seemed like. Followed by 9ers. Seems to describe me rather adequately.
Post by: MonkeyHead on June 23, 2013, 11:58:47 am
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2013, 12:06:22 pm
Post by: sjm9876 on June 23, 2013, 12:07:58 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 5.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w6.
Well, it certainly fits.
Post by: kaijyuu on June 23, 2013, 12:20:23 pm
I'm apparently an even split between 2, 9, and 6. (Helper, Peacemaker, and Loyalist) Seems rather accurate.
Post by: anzki4 on June 23, 2013, 12:27:28 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 5.Seems accurate enough.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w4.
Post by: Dutchling on June 23, 2013, 12:29:52 pm
Post by: kaijyuu on June 23, 2013, 12:31:14 pm
Post by: Haspen on June 23, 2013, 12:40:15 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 4 or 5.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 4w5 or 5w4 or 5w6.
It is not clear from these test results which Enneagram type and wing you are.
Quote
Type 5 - 8.7
Type 4 - 8.7
Type 6 - 8.3
Type 7 - 7
Type 9 - 6.3
So I'm Individualistic Investigator with a sprinkle of Loyalist.
Post by: Lectorog on June 23, 2013, 12:41:26 pm
I also had a strongish wing towards 6, it seemed like.Geez scriver, you can't be 4w6. Get it together.
Post by: scriver on June 23, 2013, 12:45:11 pm
I also had a strongish wing towards 6, it seemed like.Geez scriver, you can't be 4w6. Get it together.
Well duh. It was a 5w6, of course. You know, the other groupification I scored high in?
Post by: Tarran on June 23, 2013, 12:54:02 pm
Spoiler: Detailed weights (click to show/hide)
Post by: Solifuge on June 23, 2013, 01:57:01 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 6.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 3w4 or 4w3.
It is not clear from these test results which Enneagram type and wing you are.
Spoiler: Raw Scores: (click to show/hide)
Okay, Loyalist, with some Individualist and Achiever thrown in. Seems I'm pretty close on 6, 3, and 4, and a combination of the three seems to fit the bill. I have my own internal code of conduct that I strongly adhere to, fear isolation and abandonment, tend to seek others for guidance, try to impress and entertain people to gain their approval (often by making creative and self-expressive things), am loyal, diplomatic, and self conscious to a fault, and do the Bundle Of Opposites, React-To-The-Current-Strongest-Influence internal Ping-Pong thing.
Spoiler: Type 6 - The Loyalist (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Wings - 4w3 or 3w4 (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2013, 02:40:11 pm
Post by: Solifuge on June 23, 2013, 02:54:45 pm
In Enneagram Geometry Land, I am the circle. It's me.
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2013, 03:03:08 pm
Post by: Frumple on June 23, 2013, 03:06:01 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 9.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 9w1.
Spoiler: Delightful imbalance (click to show/hide)
Post by: Diablous on June 23, 2013, 03:07:36 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 9.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 9w1.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So, keeping peace and harmony with some perfectionism. Sounds about right.
Post by: AlleeCat on June 23, 2013, 03:07:53 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 9.I dunno, I'd say 9w1 is a pretty good match. Or just 1.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w6 or 6w5 or 9w1.
Type 9 - 9.3
Type 6 - 8.3
Type 5 - 8.3
Type 1 - 6.3
Type 4 - 5.7
Type 8 - 2
Wing 9w1 - 12.5
Wing 6w5 - 12.5
Wing 5w6 - 12.5
Wing 5w4 - 11.2
Wing 1w9 - 11
Wing 9w8 - 10.3
Wing 4w5 - 9.9
Wing 6w7 - 9.5
Wing 1w2 - 7.8
Wing 4w3 - 7.2
Wing 8w9 - 6.7
Wing 8w7 - 3.2
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on June 23, 2013, 03:08:39 pm
Post by: RedWarrior0 on June 23, 2013, 03:11:27 pm
Quote
Type 9 - 12.3
Type 5 - 9.3
Type 1 - 5
Type 8 - 1
Wing 9w1 - 14.8
Wing 9w8 - 12.8
Wing 1w9 - 11.2
Wing 5w6 - 10
Wing 5w4 - 9.8
Wing 8w9 - 7.2
Wing 1w2 - 5.9
Wing 8w7 - 3.7
Post by: misko27 on June 23, 2013, 03:19:54 pm
Second, I seem to be annoying it. I appearantly don't follow any of the traits well. OR rather, I follow multiple ones.
Quote
Type 5 - 10.3
Type 6 - 10
Type 9 - 9
Type 3 - 7.3
Type 8 - 6.3
Type 4 - 5.7
Type 1 - 5.3
Type 7 - 2.3
Wing 5w6 - 15.3
Wing 6w5 - 15.2
Wing 5w4 - 13.2
Wing 9w8 - 12.2
Wing 9w1 - 11.7
Wing 6w7 - 11.2
Wing 4w5 - 10.9
Wing 8w9 - 10.8
Wing 3w4 - 10.2
Wing 1w9 - 9.8
Wing 4w3 - 9.4
Wing 3w2 - 8.2
Wing 8w7 - 7.5
Wing 7w6 - 7.3
Wing 1w2 - 6.2
Wing 7w8 - 5.5
Post by: Solifuge on June 23, 2013, 03:46:45 pm
Spoiler: Raw Scores: (click to show/hide)
Okay, Loyalist, with some Individualist and Achiever thrown in.
Whoa, Soli, you're hella well-rounded.
>_<;
In Enneagram Geometry Land, I am the circle. It's me.
Haha, no worries. Maybe you're secretly a 9? That was going to be my guess, anyhow.
I do the easygoing idealism thing, and the self-effacing thing, and could definitely see parts of that... but I'm not sure it's the closest fit. I enjoy conflict too much, particularly constructive conflicts, or those that happen in a safe space (debates, competitive and conflict-driven games like Mafia, etc.). I also take pride in being able to be confronted, even violently, and standing my ground / adhering to my internal code of conduct, even when it ends up being detrimental, which seems to be a Loyalist trait. I used to view it as stupidity and stubbornness, but I've grown to appreciate it since.
Although...
Quote from: http://www.eclecticenergies.com/enneagram/type9.php
Nines frequently mistype themselves as they have a rather diffuse sense of their own identities. This is exacerbated by the fact that Nines often merge with their loved ones and through a process of identification take on the characteristics of those closest to them.
...and I -do- do the Personality Tofu thing, where I adopt the flavor of my social surroundings. That, and folks I admire and/or who represent things I'd like to emulate tend to rub off on me, to the point that I even crib vernacular and mannerisms from them. So who knows?
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2013, 03:51:11 pm
You seem... to me, you seem like a 6, 4, and 9 more than anything else.
Post by: Tiruin on June 23, 2013, 03:54:12 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sigulbard on June 23, 2013, 04:02:42 pm
Post by: Xantalos on June 23, 2013, 04:15:20 pm
Does anybody else try those tests and just quit halfway cause they're so damn boring to do?This being.
Post by: Xantalos on June 23, 2013, 04:18:37 pm
Quote
You are most likely a type 9.
Your wings seem to be balanced.
No personality test is completely accurate. Although several measures were taken to make this test as accurate as possible, there's always a chance that you are not typed correctly by it. Therefore, when deciding which Enneagram type and wing you are, you might also want to consider the types with the highest test scores on the lists below.
(Note that your lowest scores may be omitted.)
Type 9 - 10
Type 5 - 9.7
Type 1 - 4.3
Type 8 - 4
Wing 9w1 - 12.2
Wing 9w8 - 12
Wing 5w6 - 10.2
Wing 5w4 - 10.1
Wing 1w9 - 9.3
Wing 8w9 - 9
Wing 8w7 - 5.9
Wing 1w2 - 5.3
Post by: Solifuge on June 23, 2013, 04:32:29 pm
Spoiler: Still working on being this kind of person consistently: (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on June 23, 2013, 04:43:00 pm
Quote from: So for some reason I'm like this...
Spoiler: Low points in life (click to show/hide)Spoiler: High points in life (click to show/hide)Spoiler: In general (click to show/hide)
...Though I feel like just two types don't even describe half of me somehow.
Post by: scriver on June 23, 2013, 06:04:54 pm
Huh. The more detailed site (http://www.enneagraminstitute.com/descript.asp#.UcdguJwlKTU)is interesting... particularly the Healthy vs. Unhealthy Levels toward the bottom of each page.Spoiler: Still working on being this kind of person consistently: (click to show/hide)
Heh, that pretty much sums me up as well, and 9 was my fourth biggest hit. Glancing through 5 and 6, those fit in pretty well too.
...Hey, I'm detecting a pattern here. One of those tests, is it?
Post by: misko27 on June 23, 2013, 10:28:39 pm
Quote
Type 9 - 10
Type 8 - 9
Type 4 - 8.7
Type 7 - 8.7
Type 2 - 8
Type 5 - 7.3
Type 6 - 7.3
Type 3 - 7.3
Type 1 - 4.7
Wing 9w8 - 14.5
Wing 8w9 - 14
Wing 8w7 - 13.4
Wing 7w8 - 13.2
Wing 7w6 - 12.4
Wing 4w5 - 12.4
Wing 4w3 - 12.4
Wing 9w1 - 12.4
Wing 6w7 - 11.7
Wing 5w4 - 11.7
Wing 2w3 - 11.7
Wing 3w4 - 11.7
Wing 3w2 - 11.3
Wing 6w5 - 11
Wing 5w6 - 11
Wing 2w1 - 10.4
Wing 1w9 - 9.7
Wing 1w2 - 8.7
Post by: Powder Miner on June 23, 2013, 10:58:20 pm
You are most likely a type 6.
Your wings seem to be balanced.
Spoiler: Wings (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on June 24, 2013, 01:24:38 am
I'm pretty confused with the results, but they make sense after a bit of checking.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It never said my wings seem to be balanced for some reason. Why are my scores so high? :/
Post by: MaximumZero on June 24, 2013, 01:38:17 am
Quote
You are most likely a type 1.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 1w9.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zangi on June 24, 2013, 03:05:03 am
Quote
You are most likely a type 9.
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 9w1.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Something I am not clear on... what are wings? Are they the levels on the 2nd site you linked? Probably not.
I think I'm not balanced? Maybe?
EDIT: Instinct Edition!
Quote
You are most likely a type 5 (the Investigator) with 6 wing
Self-preservation variant
Post by: Tarran on June 24, 2013, 04:59:26 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 24, 2013, 05:19:59 am
Quote
Type 1 - 6
Type 2 - 0
Type 3 - 3
Type 4 - 3
Type 5 - 6
Type 6 - 5
Type 7 - 3
Type 8 - 5
Type 9 - 5
Spoiler: 6 (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: 5 (click to show/hide)
A good combination.
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 24, 2013, 05:21:33 am
Quote
Type 1 - 6
Type 2 - 0
Type 3 - 3
Type 4 - 3
Type 5 - 6
Type 6 - 5
Type 7 - 3
Type 8 - 5
Type 9 - 5
Spoiler: 6 (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: 5 (click to show/hide)
A good combination.
Post by: Lagslayer on June 24, 2013, 09:48:58 am
Spoiler: Long Test (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Short test (click to show/hide)
Post by: Shakerag on June 24, 2013, 12:22:55 pm
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w6.
Type 5 - 11.3
Type 6 - 10
Type 4 - 8.3
Type 9 - 7.3
Wing 5w6 - 16.3
Wing 6w5 - 15.7
Wing 5w4 - 15.5
Wing 4w5 - 14
Wing 6w7 - 11.4
Wing 4w3 - 9.5
Wing 9w1 - 8.2
Wing 9w8 - 8
Seems like a lot of 4,5,6 up in there.
I do like that the descriptions aren't all sunshine and rainbows and actually acknowledge that people could have flaws.
Post by: misko27 on June 24, 2013, 08:54:59 pm
For example, 9w8 is a Referee, not backing down even though trying to make peace.
Post by: MaximumZero on June 24, 2013, 08:57:00 pm
Post by: RedWarrior0 on June 24, 2013, 09:08:43 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on June 24, 2013, 09:17:26 pm
Wings only go adjacent. You'd either be 1w9 or 1w2. Further, the lines (from what I can tell) connect related values together, and 9 is related to 3.That's pretty much what I was hoping to get across.
Post by: TCM on June 24, 2013, 10:08:54 pm
*You have distinctive preference of Intuition over Sensing (75%)
*You have distinctive preference of Feeling over Thinking (62%)
*You have moderate preference of Judging over Perceiving (33%)
Huh.
Post by: Mr. Palau on June 24, 2013, 11:54:21 pm
INFP
Introvert(33%) iNtuitive(50%) Feeling(12%) Perceiving(44)%
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (33%) (do not wish to engage other people, but can if necessary.)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (50%)
You have slight preference of Feeling over Thinking (12%) (more like more intuition than sit and think about it)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (44%) (again, first thoughts over long internal deliberation)
Post by: GlyphGryph on June 25, 2013, 12:32:31 am
'
Ugh, this is so frustrating, as it's always essentially what I get on these things. Practically smack dab in the middle. What does it meeeeeean? It brings back memories of that time I repeatedly failed that personality test in one of my classes. >_<
Code: [Select]
Type 8 - 6.3
Type 1 - 5.7
Type 4 - 5.7
Type 3 - 5
Type 9 - 5
Type 7 - 5
Type 5 - 3.3
Type 6 - 3.3
Type 2 - 2
Wing 8w9 - 8.8
Wing 8w7 - 8.8
Wing 1w9 - 8.2
Wing 7w8 - 8.2
Wing 9w8 - 8.2
Wing 4w3 - 8.2
Wing 3w4 - 7.9
Wing 9w1 - 7.9
Wing 4w5 - 7.4
Wing 1w2 - 6.7
Wing 7w6 - 6.7
Wing 5w4 - 6.2
Wing 3w2 - 6
Wing 6w7 - 5.8
Wing 5w6 - 5
Wing 6w5 - 5
Wing 2w1 - 4.9
Wing 2w3 - 4.5
Post by: misko27 on June 25, 2013, 12:34:43 am
Post by: hops on June 25, 2013, 01:20:50 am
Taking wings into account, you seem to be a 5w6."
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Reading through the types, I am either a 9, 6, or a 5. I have no fucking clue. :-\
Post by: Cecilff2 on June 25, 2013, 11:26:30 am
I've taken the enneagram quite a few times. Almost always get 9 no wing.
But today, I am apparently a 4 or a 5 winging each other or a 5 w 6.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Taking the instinctual one instead, I get 9 w 1, with 9 and 1 being quite a bit ahead of everything else.
Post by: anzki4 on June 25, 2013, 11:42:58 am
Post by: Max White on June 26, 2013, 08:18:43 pm
Going from Australia~
Option 1: US of A
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Option 2: The great rival, New Zealand!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Option 3: Oh Canada!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Option 4: The Motherland, United Kingdom!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Ok so I was kind of hoping Canada would be a lot better than it was, as I was thinking of living there one day. Is there no nation that can top AUS, and speaks English? Crap, guess I'm stuck here for now with the wildlife.
Post by: werty892 on June 26, 2013, 08:33:08 pm
I broke it. But In other news, AUS is pretty great.
Also, everywhere has less AIDS then the united states. Man, I thought you could get help here, what the hell? :P
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 26, 2013, 08:35:02 pm
Post by: Max White on June 26, 2013, 08:36:39 pm
I hear a lot of good things from Northen Europe...
Denmark!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 26, 2013, 08:37:30 pm
Post by: PanH on June 26, 2013, 08:39:40 pm
Post by: Max White on June 26, 2013, 08:40:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: PanH on June 26, 2013, 08:43:46 pm
Post by: Lectorog on June 26, 2013, 08:45:12 pm
That actually looks pretty good! Shame I can't speak Japanese...Good news: The Japanese speak English.
Seriously, though, you could move there and then take lessons in Japanese, rather than the other way around.
Post by: PanH on June 26, 2013, 08:46:30 pm
More or less ...That actually looks pretty good! Shame I can't speak Japanese...Good news: The Japanese speak English.
Post by: RedWarrior0 on June 26, 2013, 08:47:51 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
...Daaaaamn.
Post by: Tarran on June 26, 2013, 08:52:53 pm
In other news, based on many comparisons, apparently the average for the USA is kinda terrible compared to europe aside from money and sometimes some other things.
Post by: misko27 on June 26, 2013, 09:18:04 pm
Also, Afghanistan, man oh man. Just Do it for yourself guys, trust me.
EDIT: My life average decreases LESS with North Korea then Afghanistan. By 300%. Holy shit.
Post by: Tarran on June 26, 2013, 09:35:25 pm
Post by: RedWarrior0 on June 26, 2013, 09:43:19 pm
Quote from: If North Korea were your home instead of Afghanistan you would...
So, the problem is that at low numbers a small change (Such as $800 GDP per capita vs $1900) is a large percentage. It also only has quantifiable, objective things included, which negate personal freedoms and happiness respectively.
use 96.8 times more electricity:
The per capita consumption of electricity in North Korea is 769kWh while in Afghanistan it is 8kWh.
consume 4.1 times more oil
North Korea consumes 0.0295 gallons of oil per day per capita while Afghanistan consumes 0.0072
live 19.48 years longer
The life expectancy at birth in North Korea is 64.13 while in Afghanistan it is 44.65.
make 2.4 times more money
The GDP per capita in North Korea is $1,900 while in Afghanistan it is $800
have 66.9% less chance of dying in infancy
The number of deaths of infants under one year old in a given year per 1,000 live births in North Korea is 50.15 while in Afghanistan it is 151.50.
spend 98.9% less money on health care
Per capita public and private health expenditures combined in North Korea are $1 USD while Afghanistan spends $91 USD
Post by: misko27 on June 26, 2013, 09:48:26 pm
Well, I don't know much about Afghanistan or North Korea, but I'm pretty sure Afghanistan is massively less stabilized than North Korea. And I'm pretty sure the fact that people are very likely still shooting each-other in there thanks to us Americans doesn't help.That's a bit, simple. Things are getting relatively better. For a while it was just the Americans shooting the Taliban and the periodic civilian, and the Taliban shooting Americans and some civlilians. Now it's the Afghan Security forces trained by the US shooting the Taliban and the Taliban doing what they do.
It still sounds pretty bad though. Compare Afghanistan to some poor African nations please.
Post by: Eagle_eye on June 26, 2013, 10:20:18 pm
use 5.7 times more electricity
consume 5.5 times more oil
live 18.61 years longer
be 10 times more likely to have HIV/AIDS
have 65.12% less chance of dying in infancy
spend 69.23% less money on health care
make 25% more money
have 0.58% less babies
Post by: Xantalos on June 27, 2013, 12:19:02 am
be 38.3 times more likely to have HIV/AIDS
have 11.2 times more chance of being unemployed
have 6.2 times higher chance of dying in infancy
have 3.1 times more babies
die 33.74 years sooner
consume 98.33% less oil
use 94.11% less electricity
experience 56.07% more of a class divide
spend 98.97% less money on health care
Post by: anzki4 on June 27, 2013, 08:13:19 am
Spoiler: USA (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: UK (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Sweden (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Australia (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on June 27, 2013, 08:29:38 am
Comparing Finland to a few places:Finland, you use too much electricity.Spoiler: USA (click to show/hide)Spoiler: UK (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Sweden (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Australia (click to show/hide)
Post by: miauw62 on June 27, 2013, 08:57:50 am
Quote
If The United States were your home instead of Belgium you would...Dat class divide.
experience 60.71% more of a class divide
spend 2.1 times more money on health care
use 53.31% more electricity
have 40.18% more chance of dying in infancy
have 36.93% more babies
make 26.78% more money
work 22.33% more hours each year
be 3 times more likely to have HIV/AIDS
have 12.05% more chance of being unemployed
consume 8.6% less oil
die 1.13 years sooner
Post by: anzki4 on June 27, 2013, 09:19:08 am
Finland, you use too much electricity.I think quite a chunk of it goes to heating, having cold winters and all that. Plus at least we seem to consume way less oil than most countries.
Post by: Solifuge on June 27, 2013, 09:57:04 am
Spoiler: United Kingdom, Canada, France (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Australia, New Zealand, Japan (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: And just because their National Anthem is 87.03% better... (click to show/hide)
Moral of the story: apart from slightly lower average wages, pretty much every country I've considered moving to is statistically better than the US. And the average wage data for the US is probably inflated in part by the class-divide, and fabulously wealthy folks screwing with the average.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 27, 2013, 09:59:33 am
Post by: Solifuge on June 27, 2013, 10:28:54 am
Spoiler: United Kingdom, Canada, France (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Australia, New Zealand, Japan (click to show/hide)Spoiler: And just because their National Anthem is 87.03% better... (click to show/hide)
Moral of the story: apart from slightly lower average wages, pretty much every country I've considered moving to is statistically better than the US. And the average wage data for the US is probably inflated in part by the class-divide, and fabulously wealthy folks screwing with the average.
I'm noticing now that it only seems to measure the cost of healthcare, not it's availability or quality.
Quality of health-care is actually fairly difficult to measure, but Infant Mortality and Age At Death are good metrics to use, when inferring Health Care quality.
As it turns out, most the countries which have considerably cheaper health care than the US also have a better track record when it comes to preventing Infant Mortality, and Premature Mortality.
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 28, 2013, 06:15:43 pm
have 36.64% more babies
TO BEST KOREA WE GO
BABIES AND FREE HEALTHCARE
Post by: MaximumZero on June 28, 2013, 09:12:15 pm
Also:
Quote
If Qatar were your home instead of The United States you would...
make 2.6 times more money
consume 2.4 times more oil
have 99.35% more chance of dying in infancy
have 94.62% more chance at being employed
use 30.78% more electricity
spend 58.94% less money on health care
die 2.73 years sooner
have 12.36% more babies
be 83.33% less likely to have HIV/AIDS
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 28, 2013, 09:15:46 pm
They should do US State comparison.Or as it would quickly become; "Thank The Google Overlords I Don't Live In Mississippi".
Post by: misko27 on June 28, 2013, 09:50:40 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 28, 2013, 09:54:47 pm
Post by: Solifuge on August 05, 2013, 01:38:50 am
Sorry, I'm on a bit of a Career Testing binge. The Holland Test is one of those "What Job Could You Practically Do And Enjoy" things. Just did one interactively with some friends, and we talked about how ridiculous some of the questions seemed. "Oh boy, nothing I love more in the world than Operating a Calculator, or Checking Shipping Manifests." But then as we talked, we realized that some people actually do enjoy those activities. At least for a time.
For added fun, plug your 3-letter results into the O*Net Job Thinger (http://www.onetonline.org/explore/interests/), and look at all the practical jobs they recommend. I was close between IAS and IAR (Investigative, Artistic, and Social or Realistic), and apparently Anthropology, Psychology, Woodworking and Instrument Repair are jobs I'd be a good fit for. If I wasn't busy not getting a PhD, and doing something else entirely!
Spoiler: RESULTS (click to show/hide)
Also did the Big 5 Personality Test (http://personality-testing.info/tests/BIG5.php) (It's one of the tests a lot of prospective employers give you). I've been curious what the results from those tests look like. Apparently, I have less respect for rules and organizations than the vast majority of people.
Extraversion |||||||| 2.7 (42%) (34 percentile)
Conscientiousness ||||||| 2.4 (35%) (9 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||||| 3.2 (55%) (56 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||||||||||||| 4.6 (89%) (83 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||||||||| 4.6 (89%) (76 percentile)
Post by: Descan on August 05, 2013, 01:43:13 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Good thing, apparently I'm well suited for the field I want to go into, Neuropsych. At least the research area. :P
And I got
Code: [Select]
Extraversion |||||||| 42% (34 percentile)
Conscientiousness ||||||||| 44% (20 percentile)
Neuroticism |||||||||||||| 70% (78 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||||||||||||| 85% (74 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||||| 95% (87 percentile)
Post by: Tarran on August 05, 2013, 02:01:30 am
Code: [Select]
Extraversion || 12% (4 percentile)
Conscientiousness|||||||| 40% (14 percentile)
Neuroticism |||||| 32% (22 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||||||| 62% (26 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||| 57% (12 percentile)Apparently I am somewhat unique. I feel special.
You have three seconds to see what I did there.
Post by: Vector on August 05, 2013, 02:07:43 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Go figure. Apparently you need a higher realism/conventional score to be a mathematician >_> My profile is straight-up "teacher of schoolchildren."
Extraversion |||||||||| 52% (49 percentile)
Conscientiousness|||||||||||| 62% (52 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||| 44% (40 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||||||||| 70% (39 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||||| 95% (87 percentile)
Look at how normal I am
Post by: Jelle on August 05, 2013, 02:56:33 am
Quote
Extraversion 0% (0 percentile)
Conscientiousness ||||||||||| 55% (37 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||| 47% (44 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||| 37% (4 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||| 85% (65 percentile)
Quote
(http://personality-testing.info/tests/images/RIASECi.php?R=16&I=40&A=16&S=11&E=14&C=18)
Your Holland Code has been calculated as ICA, meaning you are a thinking (I) organizing (C) Creator (A).
Quote
Operate a calculatorWhat
Post by: scrdest on August 05, 2013, 05:35:04 am
Extraversion |||||||||| 50% (45 percentile)
Conscientiousness |||||| 30% (5 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||||||||| 75% (84 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||||||| 57% (19 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||| 87% (71 percentile)
The high Neuroticism score baffles me, since I disagreed with most of the statements that classify someone as neurotic. And apparently, I'm a bit of a psychopath. Then again, this IS Bay12.
EDITUS: Ah, well, I read the explainations, and it makes sense now. Conscientiousness refers to sticking to the rules.
Post by: werty892 on August 05, 2013, 11:11:45 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Extraversion ||||||||| 47% (41 percentile)
Conscientiousness|||||| 30% (5 percentile)
Neuroticism |||||||||| 50% (48 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||| 35% (3 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||||||| 80% (52 percentile)
No Idea I was so open.
Post by: freeformschooler on August 05, 2013, 11:30:22 am
Conscientiousness||||||||| 47% (24 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||||||| 65% (71 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||||||||||||| 89% (83 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||||||| 80% (52 percentile)
SO AGREEABLE
HEY SOLIFUGE IF WE COMBINED OUR AGREEABLENESS WE'D BE 178% AGREEABLE
NO ONE COULD DISAGREE WITH US, WE'D RULE THE WORLD
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 05, 2013, 11:39:33 am
Your Holland Code has been calculated as IAR, meaning you are a thinking (I) creating (A) Doer (R).
Job prospects:
Astronomers
Biochemists and Biophysicists
Geneticists
Landscape Architects
Extraversion |||||||||||| 60% (61 percentile)
Conscientiousness |||||||||| 52% (33 percentile)
Neuroticism |||||||||||| 62% (68 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||||||| 57% (19 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||||||||| 89% (76 percentile)
Not sure exactly what to make of this? Seems... a bit less than useful?
Post by: Shakerag on August 05, 2013, 12:06:08 pm
Job Prospects:
Inspectors, Testers, Sorters, Samplers, and Weighers
Computer Operators <-- (Well, I am a computer programmer ...)
Electronic Drafters
Mapping Technicians
Medical Transcriptionists
Occupational Health and Safety Technicians
Police Identification and Records Officers
Geophysical Data Technicians
Extraversion 4% (1 percentile)
Conscientiousness||||||||||| 55% (37 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||| 27% (16 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||| 25% (1 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||| 62% (18 percentile)
I'm so cloistered and bitter. Awesome.
Post by: MonkeyHead on August 05, 2013, 12:13:28 pm
(http://personality-testing.info/tests/images/RIASECi.php?R=26&I=21&A=17&S=19&E=17&C=22)
our Holland Code has been calculated as RCI, meaning you are a doing (R) organizing (C) Thinker (I).
Your primary type was REALISTIC. Realistic people like to do things in a practical way.
Makes sense to me.
Job Prospects:
Mining machine operator.
Oil or Gas derrick operator.
Farmworker.
Agricultural grader and sorter.
Grinder/polisher.
Textile/garment worker.
Quarry worker.
Tire changer
Lumberjack.
Seems I am in the wrong trade.
Big 5
Extraversion ||||||||||||| 67% (72 percentile)
Conscientiousness|||||||||| 52% (33 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||||||| 67% (75 percentile)
Agreeableness || 12% (0 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||| 75% (42 percentile)
Sounds about right - a loud gobshite.
Post by: Lectorog on August 05, 2013, 12:36:16 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I only answered a full "enjoy" to one of the prompts (mapping the ocean floor, because seriously), so I'm thinking none of the jobs they recommend will quite be my fit.
Code: [Select]
Extraversion |||||| 30% (18 percentile)
Conscientiousness||||||||||||| 65% (57 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||| 47% (44 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||||||| 57% (19 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||| 87% (71 percentile)
Guys help why am I so average
Post by: Vector on August 05, 2013, 01:57:01 pm
Post by: Solifuge on August 05, 2013, 02:03:32 pm
Extraversion |||||||| 40% (31 percentile)
Conscientiousness||||||||| 47% (24 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||||||||| 65% (71 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||||||||||||| 89% (83 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||||||| 80% (52 percentile)
SO AGREEABLE
HEY SOLIFUGE IF WE COMBINED OUR AGREEABLENESS WE'D BE 178% AGREEABLE
NO ONE COULD DISAGREE WITH US, WE'D RULE THE WORLD
At last, my years of being friendly and finding compromises with others will pay off! Ahahahahahahahaha!
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 06, 2013, 12:45:32 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Extraversion |||| 20% (9 percentile)
Conscientiousness||||| 25% (2 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||||| 37% (29 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||||||| 55% (16 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||||| 95% (87 percentile)
Post by: MaximumZero on August 06, 2013, 01:35:02 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Job Choices: Desktop Publisher, Technical Writer(good, good), Mathematician (wait, wut?).
Post by: Mr Space Cat on August 06, 2013, 02:28:10 am
Spoiler: First go (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Second go (click to show/hide)
I find it interesting how despite the extraversion going down, the agreeableness actually went up anyway. Neuroticism went down, which surprises me because I'm generally sarcastic and pessimistic about most things. I've gotten plenty of comments on it. No change in conscientiousness, neat. Openness went up.
Spoiler: Holland Test (click to show/hide)
Yep, that sounds like me in a nutshell. Gotta do creative productive stuff all the time errytime.
Spoiler: Jobs List (click to show/hide)
All the science stuff besides space stuff are respectable professions, but I don't particularly have any interest in it. Only cool stuff would be the astronomer and instrument maintenance bits.
Post by: FritzPL on August 10, 2013, 03:44:04 pm
Your Holland Code has been calculated as CES, meaning you are a organizing (C) persuading (E) Helper (S).
Job prospects:
fucking none, because I'm too average
Extraversion ||||| 25% (13 percentile)
Conscientiousness|||||||||||| 62% (52 percentile)
Neuroticism ||||| 25% (13 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||| 42% (6 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||||||| 80% (52 percentile)
Post by: Darvi on August 10, 2013, 04:51:56 pm
No surprises there, with my general lack of pathos.
Can't do the holland test because I never did most of those things.
Post by: lue on August 10, 2013, 06:24:28 pm
A Creating Thinking Doer (AIR)
(http://personality-testing.info/tests/images/RIASECi.php?R=12&I=12&A=25&S=8&E=8&C=10)
According to that onetonline site, the best thing for me is a landscape architect (which is only true if I'm doing it in blender :P )
That test didn't do much for me, because most of the questions were centered on things that were doable before the age of computers (not one single "Create software for financial institutions" (create, not use)). I answered "Dislike" to most of them as a result. I also didn't mark much things as "Enjoy" except for writing songs or stories, which I already do, if not to a completed state :P .
Big 5
(That text output needs to learn plaintext formatting better.)
Code: [Select]
Extraversion |||| 20% (9 percentile)
Conscientiousness |||||||||||||| 70% (66 percentile)
Neuroticism |||||||| 42% (37 percentile)
Agreeableness ||||||||||||||| 75% (51 percentile)
Openness ||||||||||||||||||| 95% (87 percentile)I don't think I'm nearly that agreeable when it's something I truly care about :) .
Enneagram
Code: [Select]
Type 1 Perfectionism |||||||||||||| 54%
Type 2 Helpfulness |||||||||||| 42%
Type 3 Image Focus |||||||||||| 42%
Type 4 Individualism |||||||||||||| 58%
Type 5 Intellectualism |||||||||||||||| 62%
Type 6 Security Focus |||||||||||||| 54%
Type 7 Adventurousness |||||||||||| 46%
Type 8 Aggressiveness |||||||||| 34%
Type 9 Calmness |||||||||||| 50%
Your main type is Type 5
Your variant stacking is spsosxHm. Nothing too extreme with the enneagram. Not sure what to make of it.
Post by: Guardian G.I. on August 10, 2013, 06:52:58 pm
Code: [Select]
Extraversion 4% (1 percentile)
Conscientiousness|||||| 30% (5 percentile)
Neuroticism |||||||| 40% (32 percentile)
Agreeableness |||||||||||| 62% (26 percentile)
Openness |||||||||||| 60% (15 percentile)
Calculated by http://personality-testing.info/tests/BIG5.phpAs you can see, I'm truly a people's person.
Country comparison:
Quote
If The United States were your home instead of Belarus you would...
have 9.3 times more chance of being unemployed
spend 10.8 times more money on health care
make 4 times more money
use 3.9 times more electricity
consume 3.3 times more oil
experience 61.29% more of a class divide
have 41.7% more babies
live 7.32 years longer
be 3 times more likely to have HIV/AIDS
have 3.15% less chance of dying in infancy
Quote
If Poland were your home instead of Belarus you would...
have 8.9 times more chance of being unemployed
make 54.31% more money
live 4.93 years longer
consume 26% less oil
experience 25.09% more of a class divide
spend 47.51% more money on health care
use 5.81% more electricity
have 5.05% more chance of dying in infancy
be 50% less likely to have HIV/AIDS
have 2.87% more babies
Quote
If North Korea were your home instead of Belarus you would...
have 7.9 times higher chance of dying in infancy
consume 96.33% less oil
make 83.62% less money
use 75.81% less electricity
spend 99.84% less money on health care
have 49.39% more babies
die 6.79 years sooner
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 10, 2013, 06:56:47 pm
Post by: Guardian G.I. on August 10, 2013, 07:03:03 pm
Ah yes, the fabled North Korean healthcare system.According to this website, North Korea apparently spends 1 (one!) dollar on healthcare per capita.
Post by: Scoops Novel on August 10, 2013, 07:32:21 pm
Putting ISA in the O-NET search bar suggested computer systems analysis, lol nope.
Score between 1 and 5, percentage based on how many you outrank
Extraversion 3.8 (75 percent)
Conscientiousness 2.9 (24 percent)
Neuroticism 3.3 (60 percent)
Agreeableness 3.8 (39 percent)
Openness 4.4 (65 percent)
Post by: Lagslayer on August 10, 2013, 07:58:44 pm
My 4 top jobs are all computer related. They can kiss my ass.
Post by: lue on August 10, 2013, 10:54:45 pm
Spoiler: My Bartle Score (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on August 10, 2013, 11:21:20 pm
Eh?
Post by: Putnam on August 10, 2013, 11:22:55 pm
Post by: FuzzyZergling on August 11, 2013, 12:27:00 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: alexandertnt on August 11, 2013, 12:46:19 am
Some of those quesitons though...
Post by: Lectorog on August 11, 2013, 01:42:41 am
Code: [Select]
Explorer 93%
Achiever 40%
Killer 40%
Socializer 27%
It's a pretty bad test. Most of the answers have reasonable motives that are outside the scope of the tested qualities.
Post by: Vector on August 11, 2013, 01:50:08 am
Post by: Mr Space Cat on August 11, 2013, 02:33:51 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Sounds like me. Don't like the focus on MMORPGs, I haven't played one of those in years, I think. Never liked 'em much anyway.
Could've used more choices, the bot was a sad attempt at wit, and every single person who took that test recently and signed up for that site got Achiever. Coincidence, I think not.
Post by: Solifuge on August 11, 2013, 02:36:55 am
That test annoyed me. Commentary Bot aside, I'd like to see something similar that didn't base itself on MMORPGs, which I've only played long enough to realize how much I don't enjoy them.
With games (as well as fictional settings in general), I do tend to be more interested in the world and setting, and how it frames the characters and events.
I'm surprised I got so low on Socializer. I love challenge in games, but I play most multiplayer games in order to spend time with friends.
Post by: Lectorog on August 11, 2013, 02:43:58 am
Could've used more choices, the bot was a sad attempt at wit, and every single person who took that test recently and signed up for that site got Achiever. Coincidence, I think not.If you're talking about the list of people displayed on the results page, that list should've been titled "RECENT QUIZ RESULTS FOR ACHIEVERS". Definitely not a coincidence.
Post by: alexandertnt on August 11, 2013, 03:29:52 am
Well, I think its time to start my new career as a sucessful entrepreneur.
Post by: MaximumZero on August 11, 2013, 10:00:34 am
(http://i.imgur.com/PvdzFwz.png)Or a Private Investigator.
Well, I think its time to start my new career as a sucessful entrepreneur.
Post by: FritzPL on August 11, 2013, 10:22:24 am
Post by: SalmonGod on August 11, 2013, 09:13:36 pm
Post by: alexandertnt on August 11, 2013, 11:06:37 pm
Post by: Guardian G.I. on August 12, 2013, 07:54:54 am
(http://personality-testing.info/tests/images/RIASECi.php?R=20&I=21&A=15&S=14&E=13&C=21)
Top jobs: Continuous Mining Machine Operators, Derrick Operators, Oil and Gas, Logging Equipment Operators. ???
Post by: Jelle on August 12, 2013, 11:03:29 am
(http://sig.gamerdna.com/quizzes/BARTL/211578967.png?force=true)
Post by: Graknorke on August 14, 2013, 03:46:55 pm
Now see this is absolute bullshit.
My psychology is based around power through social influence. But the test has no way to acknowledge that. There is achievement beyond getting ALL THE LEVELS you know.
Post by: kaenneth on August 14, 2013, 03:58:48 pm
Post by: Solifuge on August 21, 2013, 10:17:40 pm
Anyone up for doing a What Did You Eat Today?
https://www.supertracker.usda.gov/foodtracker.aspx
(http://i.imgur.com/DyBSr3w.png)
Spoiler: Meals (click to show/hide)
I missed breakfast today. Also, I need to get me some fruit. Otherwise, I think I did okay, all things considered. I think that Protein Percentage is off though. :I
EDIT: Fixed the protein thing. Apparently the USDA treats Lentil Soup as either a Vegetable or a Protein, but not both.
Post by: Lagslayer on August 21, 2013, 10:21:17 pm
Not true! All the good science questions are just getting really weird. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_quantum_mechanics)Bananas are cheap.
Anyone up for doing a What Did You Eat Today?
https://www.supertracker.usda.gov/foodtracker.aspx
(http://i.imgur.com/Jw1l39B.png)QuoteGrains Vegetables Fruits Dairy Protein
Target 6 oz. 2½ cup(s) 2 cup(s) 3 cup(s) 5½ oz.
Eaten 8 oz. 1½ cup(s) ¼ cup(s) ¾ cup(s) 6 oz.
Status Over Under Under Under OK
Total Eaten:
2071 CaloriesSpoiler: Meals (click to show/hide)
I missed breakfast today. Also, I need to get me some fruit. Otherwise, I think I did okay, all things considered. I think that Protien Percentage is off though. :I
Or if all else fails, you can always take a multi-vitamin. Not quite perfect, but close enough to fill most of the gaps otherwise filled by various plants.
Post by: RedWarrior0 on August 21, 2013, 10:38:13 pm
Post by: Lectorog on August 21, 2013, 10:45:41 pm
All I ate today was half a calzone from Old Chicago. As far as nutrition is concerned I'm starving myself. A bit less than 600 calories, 1/3 daily fat (1/2 sat. fat), 1/8 cholesterol, 1/2 sodium, 1/4 carbs, 1/6 fiber, 1/4 protein. But hey, it has 2/3 of my daily vitamin C recommendation! 1/8 A, 1/3 calcium, 1/10 iron. Y'know.
Post by: Vector on August 22, 2013, 12:07:20 am
HAH
And I ate a surprisingly balanced diet, getting 75% the recommended daily values or so (look, I honestly just need less food than most people do) on everything except dairy (don't eat that). Huh. I just ate what I felt like eating, to be honest, which is kind of cool.
Post by: MonkeyHead on August 22, 2013, 05:12:52 am
(http://i.imgur.com/YkA7O5X.png)
Based on a day of no breakfast, a massive ham and blue cheese sandwich for lunch, and a chicken/pasta combo for dinner, with icecream infront of shit tv before bed.
Despite being under 2000 calories, I am suprised I am alive. Worrying was the fact that I was 30% over on my fat allowance (CURSE YOU CHEESE!) and almost double my salt allowance (Soy sauce will be the death of me). The day before was probably even worse as it consisted of no breakfast, a massive cheese and bacon pankake for lunch, a McDonalds dinner, and doughnuts and beer in the evening. I love being a chubster.
Post by: Lagslayer on August 22, 2013, 01:16:49 pm
What I ate yesterday:I've read that potassium helps to counteract excess sodium, to a point, at least. Or you can just, you know, drink more water.
(http://i.imgur.com/YkA7O5X.png)
Based on a day of no breakfast, a massive ham and blue cheese sandwich for lunch, and a chicken/pasta combo for dinner, with icecream infront of shit tv before bed.
Despite being under 2000 calories, I am suprised I am alive. Worrying was the fact that I was 30% over on my fat allowance (CURSE YOU CHEESE!) and almost double my salt allowance (Soy sauce will be the death of me). The day before was probably even worse as it consisted of no breakfast, a massive cheese and bacon pankake for lunch, a McDonalds dinner, and doughnuts and beer in the evening. I love being a chubster.
Post by: Solifuge on August 22, 2013, 01:33:57 pm
Bananas are cheap.
I've read that potassium helps to counteract excess sodium, to a point, at least.
You must be some kind of Banana Hustler, pushing your foreign yellow fruit on everyone like that. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yModCU1OVHY)
Post by: Lagslayer on August 22, 2013, 09:17:47 pm
Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas!Bananas are cheap.I've read that potassium helps to counteract excess sodium, to a point, at least.
You must be some kind of Banana Hustler, pushing your foreign yellow fruit on everyone like that. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yModCU1OVHY)
Now, now, a bunch of people find bananas very appeeling. Bunches more also produce them. The fruits of their labor provide people worldwide with great taste and nutrition. Those who support the industry get a split of the profits. Those who oppose it often find their appeel amongst enthusiasts slipping.
Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas! Buy our Bananas!
Also, that video is creepy.
Post by: MaximumZero on August 23, 2013, 11:00:15 am
As it sits, I average about 1800 calories a day, according to the last 3 days.
Post by: werty892 on September 13, 2013, 02:14:47 pm
I got 22.
Post by: PanH on September 13, 2013, 02:31:33 pm
17.
Post by: Vector on September 13, 2013, 02:38:43 pm
Post by: MonkeyHead on September 13, 2013, 03:06:52 pm
Post by: Putnam on September 13, 2013, 03:15:29 pm
Post by: Tiruin on September 13, 2013, 03:30:59 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 13, 2013, 03:32:14 pm
Post by: werty892 on September 13, 2013, 03:44:13 pm
Post by: Powder Miner on September 13, 2013, 03:47:24 pm
Post by: Darvi on September 13, 2013, 05:34:55 pm
Also, another MSH-timeclone?
Post by: Lectorog on September 13, 2013, 06:21:48 pm
This is taking into account that I have never trained or practiced any form of combat.
Post by: misko27 on September 13, 2013, 06:22:28 pm
Post by: Darvi on September 13, 2013, 06:26:08 pm
Post by: Mr Space Cat on September 13, 2013, 06:57:29 pm
The fact I would even be in such a situation implies my moral compass has either failed terribly or is useless against the raging zerg-child swarm. Childbatting and biting are legit tactics. Not like the kids would refrain from biting or eyegouging or using their fellow children as battering rams.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 13, 2013, 07:02:59 pm
The time I realized how differently some people think about this was back in high school, when one of the guys in my class and I got to discussing how we would hypothetically fight one another. I told him what I would do (bite ears/fingers/nose, sweep legs, jump on chest repeatedly) and he just gave me this horrified look and told me that's not how you are supposed to fight.
Post by: hops on September 13, 2013, 07:04:07 pm
Post by: Xantalos on September 13, 2013, 07:14:07 pm
Post by: Solifuge on September 13, 2013, 07:14:42 pm
Though, even if I was being clearly threatened by them, I don't think I could actually take any of them in a fight. Though I'd let them tire themselves out by trying to beat me up, and hopefully win by default?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 13, 2013, 07:16:13 pm
40. Is that good?You hardly count. Countless mouldering pseudopods are far superior to the two arms the rest of us have.
Post by: hops on September 13, 2013, 07:55:38 pm
On the other hand that means we only need 40 brainwashed kids to stop an eldritch horror.40. Is that good?You hardly count. Countless mouldering pseudopods are far superior to the two arms the rest of us have.
Post by: Xantalos on September 13, 2013, 07:57:07 pm
This was presuming I was in a human body.On the other hand that means we only need 40 brainwashed kids to stop an eldritch horror.40. Is that good?You hardly count. Countless mouldering pseudopods are far superior to the two arms the rest of us have.
Post by: PanH on September 13, 2013, 08:10:42 pm
Well, 41. He can beat 40, but we need a survivor to finish him off.On the other hand that means we only need 40 brainwashed kids to stop an eldritch horror.40. Is that good?You hardly count. Countless mouldering pseudopods are far superior to the two arms the rest of us have.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 13, 2013, 08:17:23 pm
Post by: Xantalos on September 13, 2013, 08:19:27 pm
Post by: PanH on September 13, 2013, 08:21:44 pm
That guy wasn't full of shit, in the end.
Post by: Graknorke on September 14, 2013, 06:03:10 am
I reckon that I might have answered some questions incorrectly though. Like how morally bad I would feel about it.
Post by: alexandertnt on September 14, 2013, 06:19:37 am
Post by: misko27 on September 14, 2013, 10:33:41 am
Post by: Steelmagic on September 15, 2013, 03:24:02 am
Post by: Graknorke on September 15, 2013, 08:09:04 am
I never quite understood the compunction against "fighting dirty". If one is in a fight at all, there is no reason not to go all out.As far as I'm concerned it depends why you're fighting. I have no desire to permanently or severely hurt someone for life, especially if it's over something petty.
The time I realized how differently some people think about this was back in high school, when one of the guys in my class and I got to discussing how we would hypothetically fight one another. I told him what I would do (bite ears/fingers/nose, sweep legs, jump on chest repeatedly) and he just gave me this horrified look and told me that's not how you are supposed to fight.
Post by: MaximumZero on September 15, 2013, 09:10:05 am
If you're fistfighting over something petty, something has gone horribly wrong.I never quite understood the compunction against "fighting dirty". If one is in a fight at all, there is no reason not to go all out.As far as I'm concerned it depends why you're fighting. I have no desire to permanently or severely hurt someone for life, especially if it's over something petty.
The time I realized how differently some people think about this was back in high school, when one of the guys in my class and I got to discussing how we would hypothetically fight one another. I told him what I would do (bite ears/fingers/nose, sweep legs, jump on chest repeatedly) and he just gave me this horrified look and told me that's not how you are supposed to fight.
Post by: alexandertnt on September 15, 2013, 09:15:58 am
Post by: MaximumZero on September 15, 2013, 09:19:47 am
Yeah, I never understood these fighting ethics/morals, it just seems like an oxymoron. If I were in a fight to the death, you could bet I would fight dirty (and clumsily :P). What reason is there not to?I've been in two different kinds of fights, one where morals and guidelines apply, and one where at least one of the combatants is out for blood. The first only take place in dojos and tournament halls.
Post by: Darvi on September 15, 2013, 09:41:06 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 15, 2013, 11:07:55 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Let us say, that hypothetically, you have a button. If you press this button, the wealth in the nation you are currently residing in will undergo massive redistribution, effectively eliminating both the poor and rich of the nation through this redistribution and leaving the GINI coefficient of the nation under .05. This will happen every time you press the button. People will be aware that the wealth has shifted, but there will not be any practical way for it to be undone. The button's effects cannot be traced back to you by any method currently available to humanity, and to anybody else it just looks like a red plastic button. The button will effect other nations if you press it within their internationally recognized borders. The button is not particularly durable and could be destroyed with relative ease. Nobody alive today has the skill to even begin trying to reverse-engineer the button's technology.
Post by: MaximumZero on September 15, 2013, 11:42:20 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 15, 2013, 11:58:45 am
Post by: Darvi on September 15, 2013, 12:02:34 pm
Post by: Gervassen on September 15, 2013, 12:03:01 pm
Pretty much. If you're going to actually hurt your opponent, you want to fucking hurt them.
There are a lot of fights where you would want to be thought a respectable human being afterward, and most are about women somehow. You'd be surprised how many fist-fights still happen because of women. Been in some myself, but only because I'm so handsome I get their boyfriends jealous. True story, actually.
Post by: da_nang on September 15, 2013, 12:36:07 pm
/me presses the button
Post by: RedWarrior0 on September 15, 2013, 01:25:27 pm
Press. Store money in offshore bank account. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Post by: da_nang on September 15, 2013, 01:35:12 pm
Post by: Lagslayer on September 15, 2013, 02:36:36 pm
Regardless of it's specific details, I don't think I'd end up using it, both because it would cause massive chaos and because I don't like manipulating people like this. However, I would still hold onto it and store it very carefully, so that it's secrets may be unlocked.
Post by: Graknorke on September 15, 2013, 03:11:00 pm
Post by: Lectorog on September 15, 2013, 04:12:44 pm
Post by: hops on September 15, 2013, 04:18:18 pm
I would be unaffected in term of wealth, although there would probably be drastic economy shift.
i have a feeling, though, that money would probably flow back to the riches in U.S.A again because they were rich because they know how to use money. and the same goes for most chinese businessmen.
Post by: Powder Miner on September 15, 2013, 04:39:48 pm
I am another conservative pig, and I don't feel that redistribution of wealth like this is economically sound. At all.
With the way our government and our market (and by this I mean nearly every country in the world, but specifically America) is structured, it depends upon people owning businesses and having a hierarchy of who is over who.
Suddenly, those at the top can't afford to run the larger businesses. Investors can't afford to invest as heavily in businesses, because they only have a middle amount of money. Suddenly, those at the bottom no longer need to have the bad jobs they're forced to take.
Businesses find themselves rent apart, as even if people decide to keep their jobs, the business can't hold itself together monetarily. These businesses collapse. Noone except possibly a very lucky few have jobs. But hey, they've got as much money as everyone else, so it'll be fine, right?
Wrong.
Because the suppliers of goods are no longer in working order. The transporters of goods are no longer in working order. The retailers of goods are no longer in working order.
RIP actually getting things.
RIP economy.
Countries are interlaced quite heavily when it comes to the economy.
R.I.P. world economy.
...so yeah I'd break that button.
But let's suppose I don't quite know what I'm talking about here. Suppose businesses still stay afloat.
People are still going to be pissed, things are certainly going to get majorly bungled in response, legislation will likely have to be passed in droves, and things still won't be good.
Post by: Graknorke on September 15, 2013, 05:15:06 pm
Post by: Dutchling on September 15, 2013, 05:18:48 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on September 15, 2013, 05:20:17 pm
Of course, other means of developing hierarchy would still be around, since this button only effects fiat currency, but it would still be nice to topple the million mile high ladder we have currently built upon that pretext.
Post by: Baffler on September 15, 2013, 08:33:20 pm
It's an interesting thought experiment, but I don't think I would push it. Nor would I destroy it, because it could have potential to do some good. Maybe if people in some country agree to be communist I would go there and press it daily. See how things go from there.
Post by: Scelly9 on September 15, 2013, 08:37:32 pm
Post by: misko27 on September 15, 2013, 08:39:41 pm
I would press the button first thing every morning. Some shit would go down, but it would be figured out before long. I don't buy into the notion that without a handful of people wielding power over everyone else that nothing can get done. In fact, I think we'd accomplish more, because we'd be doing things that are actually important to us, instead of things that are important only to the powerful.Youl realize money is not the only thing binding the world right? The Richest Senator is not the most powerful one, although he has the same legal power. Influence, can be bought, but only if you want it.
Of course, other means of developing hierarchy would still be around, since this button only effects fiat currency, but it would still be nice to topple the million mile high ladder we have currently built upon that pretext.
SalmonGod's plan:
- Equalize US economy
- ???
- Peace
My plan?
- Step 1: Go to a high wealth country with a small population. Or maybe the US, or maybe both.
- Step 2: I'd do as mentioned and funnel money elsewhere each time, continually draining money away from the country until I had amassed a great and massive fortune.
- Step 3: I'd "equalize" some small country whose new average wealth is far lesser then my own, and use the money and resulting chaos to dominate all economic movement until I essentially run the country,
- Step 4: I'd continue, forcibly equalizing and monopolizing progressively larger countries, money being moved each time, continuing to siphon it away as in Step 2
- Step 5: Eventually, I'd amass so much money I'm leaps and bounds above the world average, and capable of ruling world economy. At this point, go to each country and equalize, moving my money each time, until every person in the world was now immeasurably poorer then I (though most likely still better off by comparison).
- Step 6: Use fortune to crush all opposition, forging wealth and power to point I can bully even the entire International Community. Monopolize everything.
- Step 7: Demand control of World or threaten New Dark age, immediately cutting off all power and control to every sector of the planet, detonating all the factories, sending thugs out to burn and slaughter, and bringing Chaos to the land and death to the leaders. Partially follow through if some need persuading.
- Step 8: Found New world Order, rule absolutely.
And the best part? I don't have any limits. I can keep going, at any step, for as long as I need. If I make a mistake, it'd be trivial to start again, even at the previous one. I could be at complete ruin, and with the push of a button I'm back. No one, anywhere would ever know what or how I accomplish what I do. As long as Currency can be moved through international borders, and physical value (such factories) remain in my hands, I can work, steadily, to becoming a complete Monopolist. No one, no matter how rich, how entrenched, could ever hope to stop me. Imagine, going to say, Switzerland, Or Cyprus, and equalizing there? Suddenly rich locals (and me), and the rich and powerful owners of offshore bank accounts suddenly powerless. Man, Nothing on God's earth could stop me. Only age, and with my wealth, how trivial! No, I'd bring a new age.
In Conclusion, Enslaving the world with Selective Equality, and proving someone will always find a way with a good enough tool.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 15, 2013, 08:41:16 pm
I see this ending with people with resources jumping ship FAST, and poor people flocking to the country. Assuming people realize what has happened, anyway. If it affects the whole WORLD on the other hand...Well, you could always walk the Earth, pressing the button inside the boarders of every country you can reach. And being that it is just a red plastic button, it would be unlikely that you'd be caught.
Post by: Baffler on September 15, 2013, 08:45:23 pm
Wouldn't people get a bit suspicious that money is being redistributed all over the place, yet somehow there's this one guy who keeps benefiting massively? Then someone who is smart and ruthless enough to figure out the connection (or just watches you long enough) assassinates you and takes it for himself, plunging the world into chaos along the way. Unless you plan to destroy the button if there's any risk of losing it. Or maybe you just don't care what happens after your hypothetical demise.
Post by: Lagslayer on September 15, 2013, 08:50:40 pm
Post by: misko27 on September 15, 2013, 08:52:01 pm
@miskoWell first, I hope to be rich enough to afford bodyguards, and a lot of them. I will have a lot of money that point you know. I need not actually do much beyond the necessary globe-trotting after all. Second,
Wouldn't people get a bit suspicious that money is being redistributed all over the place, yet somehow there's this one guy who keeps benefiting massively? Then someone who is smart and ruthless enough to figure out the connection (or just watches you long enough) assassinates you and takes it for himself, plunging the world into chaos along the way. Unless you plan to destroy the button if there's any risk of losing it. Or maybe you just don't care what happens after your hypothetical demise.
Quote
The button's effects cannot be traced back to you by any method currently available to humanity, and to anybody else it just looks like a red plastic button. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ExactWords)Always think ahead.
I gotta ask. Of the people that chose option 1, how many of you are just doing it to cheat the system and make yourself super rich?*raises hand*
Post by: Xantalos on September 15, 2013, 09:06:47 pm
Turn them on and watch.
Post by: Descan on September 15, 2013, 09:24:44 pm
And is it all their wealth or wealth tied into the nations system? A lot of the worlds riches (like a third?) are tied up in offshore banks, just sitting there. Wouldn't really do much if it doesn't affect that cash, too.
Post by: Lectorog on September 15, 2013, 09:26:06 pm
My plan is simple: study button until I can duplicate it. Copy it a million or so times. Place these copies all around the world, hooked up to autoclickers for computer mice.
Turn them on and watch.
Quote
Nobody alive today has the skill to even begin trying to reverse-engineer the button's technology.I take that to include you.
I don't see currency retaining its value after the use of the button, especially after repeated/regular use, yet its users seem to think it will work exactly as before.
Post by: Xantalos on September 15, 2013, 09:28:31 pm
But that's why I wanted to copy it in the first place and set it on autopress all over the world! If every currency constantly distributes itself, that means that you'd never have to pay for anything because any money you paid would instantly be given back to you. Everyone would have infinite money, but no money because then the system wouldn't work.My plan is simple: study button until I can duplicate it. Copy it a million or so times. Place these copies all around the world, hooked up to autoclickers for computer mice.
Turn them on and watch.QuoteNobody alive today has the skill to even begin trying to reverse-engineer the button's technology.I take that to include you.
I don't see currency retaining its value after the use of the button, especially after repeated/regular use, yet its users seem to think it will work exactly as before.
Post by: AlleeCat on September 15, 2013, 09:37:07 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 15, 2013, 09:42:21 pm
Essentially, it is a "Everybody is now middle class, if all the money was distributed evenly" button. One's previous status still has merit, though. For example, Bill Gates would still be one of the richest people around, but the gap of his wealth from everyone else would be vastly reduced.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on September 15, 2013, 10:19:50 pm
For that matter, too, I don't think a coefficient of .05 is really possible. Within a few months, even, it would shoot up into the tens, maybe the 20s, as money starts shuffling hands (better skilled workers will end up richer no matter what you do). You can keep the button, but it would be a terrible idea to make its existence known or use it as a threat; everyone with upper-middle-class skills or above will leave en masse à la John Galt. Essentially, repeated and widely-known use of such a button represents a tax rate far over 100% on income above the median. There's a reason we don't tax all somebody's income at the same bracket!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 15, 2013, 10:22:31 pm
This sounds like the plot of a badly-written leftist fantasy.That's uncreative leftist aliens for you.
Post by: frostshotgg on September 15, 2013, 11:09:47 pm
Post by: Nivim on September 16, 2013, 04:46:40 am
Then if and when they find an ideal use for the button with sufficient net gain, I would do my best to enact the plan using my resources and any that I can make available.
If they find no such use, I put the button and all the information/Gedankenexperiment-results in a metal lock box, put the lock box in styrofoam, then put the whole thing in a cement block and label it as a time capsule to be opened when I expect people to be able to reverse engineer the button.
Post by: Lectorog on September 16, 2013, 08:05:15 am
I'd press the button. I'd press it in every single country. And I'd laugh when society collapsed because everything is based around worthless paper instead of actual valuable resources. Stupidity gets punished. Stupidity on a global scale gets punished on a global scale.You should learn some more about the history of currency.
Post by: frostshotgg on September 16, 2013, 08:49:44 am
You should learn some more about the history of currency.My understanding of it right now is roughly as follows:
- Bartered goods for other goods
- Gold/shiny metals became more standard due to their scarcity and thus value
- Standardized pieces of valuable metal (coins) used
- Notes redeemable for a certain amount of valuable metal
- Notes worth only what people assign it to be
Post by: Descan on September 16, 2013, 09:10:35 am
If anything, fiat currency makes more sense. Gold is valuable because... what? It's shiny? Okay, it's good for some things because of it's properties, but that shouldn't make it worth it's weight in... well, gold. Fiat currency is backed by the military and economic might of the nation. It has a lot more backing, in the sense of "If you don't accept this, I'll call the cops on you," kind of deal. I think that's more implied, though. Don't know if you can actually call the cops on them, but it's the same idea.
Post by: Helgoland on September 16, 2013, 01:53:34 pm
And yeah, never quite understood why everyone thinks Gold is valuable in a 'metaphysical' way. It has market value, but so does fiat currency...
Post by: Gervassen on September 16, 2013, 03:02:23 pm
As for police enforcing the value of fiat money, that laughable farce never ends well. Check out Argentina for a case study in capital controls. If you're in a country that has enforced capital controls, you're usually hurting.
Post by: misko27 on September 16, 2013, 03:30:32 pm
Post by: Darvi on September 16, 2013, 03:32:14 pm
I mean, name one creature that is allergic to Gold. Cybermen don't count anymore.
Post by: frostshotgg on September 16, 2013, 05:45:57 pm
Post by: Darvi on September 16, 2013, 05:58:37 pm
Post by: frostshotgg on September 16, 2013, 06:02:51 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on September 17, 2013, 01:06:57 am
If it isn't, well, then it won't matter that much. Sure, the poor 'll be slightly better of, and the rich slightly worse. But that's all.
Post by: Helgoland on September 17, 2013, 05:59:49 am
So you're saying gold is mostly just being used for laundering drug money?Gold would actually be too bulky/heavy. (30.000$ a kilo, 12.5 kilos per bar.) They use gems for that sort of purpose.
Post by: Descan on September 17, 2013, 01:17:37 pm
Post by: ed boy on September 17, 2013, 07:11:53 pm
One of the fundamental reasons that people are able to use currency is because they know that things like this will not happen (or at least, only happen in minor and predictable ways).
The economy might be able to survive one push of the button, but it would be with enormous consequences. There would definitely be enormous chaos. You can expect large numbers of businesses to fold, including every bank. It would take decades for the system to rebuild to anything like what it is now.
Abusing it would be extremely hard to do. You might be able to take advantage of the first button press, but if it were to happen repeatedly, then nobody would ever sell you anything, so there would be no point.
Due to interconnectedness of global economies, the effects wouldn't be localized to one country, and every major economy would suffer.
The economic infrastructure would be sent back thousands of years, and if the button was pressed more than once, I can't imagine it would take long for governments to collapse and we'd see a reversion to essentially the feudal system.
Post by: Mrhappyface on September 17, 2013, 07:17:04 pm
Extravert(11%) iNtuitive(12%) Feeling(6%) Judging(22%)
You have slight preference of Extraversion over Introversion (11%)
You have slight preference of Intuition over Sensing (12%)
You have slight preference of Feeling over Thinking (6%)
You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (22%)
Post by: misko27 on September 17, 2013, 08:49:40 pm
Anyway, as long as I can use proxies, and the money affects a certain border, and these borders could be abused to cover the entire earth in "equality", I can use it to rule the world.
Post by: Solifuge on October 11, 2013, 06:19:11 pm
Quote from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vocal_range
Bass: E2 to E4
Barritone: F2 to F4
Tenor: C3 to C5
Alto: F3 to F5
Mezzo Soprano: A3 to A5
Soprano: C4 to C6
I've always known I've had a fairly high range for a dude, but I'm an Alto. F3 to D5 is my comfortable range, though I can push my voice as low as C3 (Tenor range) and as high as G5 (almost Mezzo-Soprano) with some trouble. My voice cracks a bit in those ranges, though I might be able to get them under control with practice.
How about you guys?
Post by: Darvi on October 11, 2013, 06:22:07 pm
Post by: lue on October 11, 2013, 06:44:38 pm
I have no clue where my highest note goes (I'll go ahead and guess it stops somewhere near the C4 area), however I do know just about where my lowest note is. I go down to around E2/F2, and I know this because Caiaphas sings down to a C#2 in "This Jesus Must Die" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU7htB3cyo4) (right at the start, in bold: "Ah, gentlemen, you know why we are here...") and it's always annoyed how I'm just a few semitones away from hitting it at all. It takes a couple more semitones up before I can start singing notes well, but I know E2/F2 is my current limit.
Of course falsetto adds a few notes to the range, but mine's almost entirely non-existent at the moment :P .
I'll post here later once I've gotten a chance to follow along with the video. I probably won't have anything until tomorrow.
(And for those of you who know JCSS: Peter and especially Pilate are the easiest to sing for me (baritone parts), although if I haven't listened to the musical for a while, my performance of Pilate tends to be lower than actually how it's actually sung.)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 11, 2013, 06:49:17 pm
Post by: Putnam on October 11, 2013, 09:39:23 pm
So pretty much perfectly tenor.
Post by: Vector on October 11, 2013, 09:50:26 pm
Speaking and singing in the mezzo-soprano range is doable but uncomfortable. I can "sing" (squeak) soprano parts, but I don't know why anyone would want to listen to it, because it's horrid. My range has been steadily sliding downwards since puberty so I expect that I'll lose my ability to hit those notes over the next few years and finish comfying up to tenor. I used to be firmly in alto but able to control almost all the notes for Christine's part of The Phantom of the Opera, back in high school--and now I'm at a point where the most natural part is probably Raoul's, and Christine is lolnope :S
I know all this mostly because my teacher used to make me sing violin parts, and D3/E3 was where things got doable previously (with the lowest I could voice something like B3/C3)--but my voice has definitely moved downwards since then (can voice, if not sing, G3/A3 when I work at it--if I'm measuring this right), and it seems like it's continuing to slide =/
Post by: DarkWolfXV on October 12, 2013, 05:43:21 am
Post by: scrdest on October 12, 2013, 10:14:39 am
Can't access the video right now, but I'm an alto slowly slipping into tenor (contralto).
Speaking and singing in the mezzo-soprano range is doable but uncomfortable. I can "sing" (squeak) soprano parts, but I don't know why anyone would want to listen to it, because it's horrid. My range has been steadily sliding downwards since puberty so I expect that I'll lose my ability to hit those notes over the next few years and finish comfying up to tenor. I used to be firmly in alto but able to control almost all the notes for Christine's part of The Phantom of the Opera, back in high school--and now I'm at a point where the most natural part is probably Raoul's, and Christine is lolnope :S
I know all this mostly because my teacher used to make me sing violin parts, and D3/E3 was where things got doable previously (with the lowest I could voice something like B3/C3)--but my voice has definitely moved downwards since then (can voice, if not sing, G3/A3 when I work at it--if I'm measuring this right), and it seems like it's continuing to slide =/
If you squeak the parts, that doesn't really count for the vocal range. That's why some people have problems measuring - they either squeak, cannot hold the note, or just keep going lower while still singing the lowest steady note they can pull off.
Actually, I think the lower female voices sound cooler than sopranos. Probably related to my own register.
Turns out I'm a tenor B2, maaaaybe A2 down, though I can go up a bit further than the chart would have it (C5-ish). I blame singing along to Peter Hamill.
Post by: Vector on October 12, 2013, 12:48:36 pm
Also. . . there's pretty much no play for contraltos anymore, which means that my ability to squeak around in the soprano range becomes more and more value-added. I have to sing an octave lower for pretty much any female-voiced song I should happen to hear at this point. Which. . . I guess makes sense, since tenor is an octave lower than soprano.
Post by: MonkeyHead on October 12, 2013, 01:08:27 pm
Post by: lue on October 12, 2013, 01:21:12 pm
I can't even hit D#2/Eb2. There's a clear divide between that and the next semitone, E2. Hopefully as I get older I'll eventually hit C#2 (I do gain a few semitones down if I'm lucky when I first wake up, but that's rare.)
Upwards G4 is the last I can hit with confidence. I can try for A4, but that works much better in falsetto. (Funny enough, on my Fluidsynth at least, the A4 note of the grand piano somehow sounds like a falsetto note. As in, it's more falsetto-y than G4. Weird.)
And no, I don't know the range of my falsetto. At least, not yet. :)
I guess that means I'm a bass-baritone. Which is awesome, because I've already guessed this was me for a while now, and because it's a really flexible voice type (all the benefits of middle-of-the-road baritone with a stronger bass than just baritone. Add in a falsetto and you've got high notes covered too!)
Post by: Pnx on October 12, 2013, 01:25:15 pm
Yeah, I mostly put that in because I'm a bit embarrassed by how much my range has changed and people keep making fun of me >_>It's been a while, but I seem to remember the last time there was a Vector stream, everyone really liked your voice.
Typically I think most people seem to prefer a slightly deep effeminate voice over a higher pitched one. I know I do, most because higher pitched voices tend to give me a headache.
So yeah, don't pay attention to the fun making, you're voice is tres sexy.
Post by: Solifuge on October 12, 2013, 02:17:01 pm
-snip- (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU7htB3cyo4)
Oh thanks, now I'm comparing all the different versions of my favorite JCS songs. To the Happy Thread with me.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 12, 2013, 09:31:38 pm
Post by: scrdest on October 13, 2013, 02:51:08 am
I wonder if there's a good, easy way to measure our vocal ranges?
There's this vid two pages or so back. You could also try singing to an electronic guitar tuner to see if you actually hit the note.
Post by: Aptus on October 13, 2013, 05:19:33 am
I'm just going to have to face it, I can't music :p
Post by: gigaraptor487 on October 13, 2013, 06:15:06 am
I'm INTJ
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: ECrownofFire on October 14, 2013, 08:54:48 pm
This is complicated in ENTP/INTP because ENTP is the "most introverted" of the extroverts. ENTP vs INTP is more of a matter of Ne vs Ti (extroverted intuition and introverted thinking). ENTP mainly focuses on Ne, extroverted intuition, which "finds and interprets hidden meanings". It's all about finding patterns between things that seem unrelated and putting things together. INTP mainly focuses on Ti, introverted thinking, which "seeks precision", like using exact words to describe things. It's all about classifying, analyzing, and finding logical consistency.
ENTP has Ti, but it's overwhelmed by Ne, so ENTP people constantly juggle multiple projects and theories all the time. INTP has Ne, but Ti is dominant, so Ti provides empirical data while Ne organizes it into theories and insights.
In essence, it is the difference between an inventor (ENTP) and a research scientist (INTP). Both brilliant in their own ways, but ENTP is more fun (personal bias may vary) :P
Post by: scrdest on October 15, 2013, 09:29:22 am
In MBTI terms introversion vs extroversion is a question of where you gain and lose energy. If you gain energy by talking to people, you're an extrovert. If you talk to people but need to "recharge" by yourself, you're an introvert.
This is complicated in ENTP/INTP because ENTP is the "most introverted" of the extroverts. ENTP vs INTP is more of a matter of Ne vs Ti (extroverted intuition and introverted thinking). ENTP mainly focuses on Ne, extroverted intuition, which "finds and interprets hidden meanings". It's all about finding patterns between things that seem unrelated and putting things together. INTP mainly focuses on Ti, introverted thinking, which "seeks precision", like using exact words to describe things. It's all about classifying, analyzing, and finding logical consistency.
ENTP has Ti, but it's overwhelmed by Ne, so ENTP people constantly juggle multiple projects and theories all the time. INTP has Ne, but Ti is dominant, so Ti provides empirical data while Ne organizes it into theories and insights.
In essence, it is the difference between an inventor (ENTP) and a research scientist (INTP). Both brilliant in their own ways, but ENTP is more fun (personal bias may vary) :P
Ooooh, that explains a lot for me. The very first time I took the test I got INTP, but the I/E questions are rather imprecise for, well, people like me. I've had a lot of bad luck with the people I've been forced to spend most of my daily life with, and as a result my outlook on interpersonal interactions was pretty screwed up. I/E questions ask you for preference about social vs. asocial interactions mostly, so it put me out as INTP. INTP description didn't exactly fit me, though.
However, since the Dd (douchebag density) in my life seems to be inversely proportional to time, I found that if I actually have non-awful people to interact with, I'm actually pretty sociable, and upon seeing this thread I retook the test, getting ENTP. Which makes an awful lot more sense given what you wrote.
Post by: kaijyuu on October 15, 2013, 07:31:13 pm
I'm certain he gets the sheep's consent first.Pretty much the only Welsh stereotype that I do not conform to is the fact that I can not sing and do not enjoy trying to sing. As such, I have no idea what you lot are wittering on about :P....what about the sheep? You conform to that one!?
Post by: Vector on October 27, 2013, 05:13:55 am
I'm apparently a "Free-wheeling creator" (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=pWVVSPoTgKLRfUe-HI-DAACA-9bc7&u=6b5603b81978).
Also very masculine and confident etc. BELIEVE IT
Post by: MonkeyHead on October 27, 2013, 05:27:28 am
Apparently this means I am interested in processes, methods and solutions, prizing function and practicality above other factors in my decision making. I am unemotional, possibly overly rational, and honest, often to a fault. Apparently VERY masculine, with an authoritarian streak, low openness and low empathy.
Post by: Darvi on October 27, 2013, 05:56:17 am
Post by: alexandertnt on October 27, 2013, 05:57:29 am
Im "attuned to others' thoughts and feelings" ???. This is news to me.
Post by: scriver on October 27, 2013, 06:01:27 am
Also what kind of test in these times doesn't have an "unemployed" option under what your job is.
Post by: anzki4 on October 27, 2013, 06:26:07 am
Post by: Kansa on October 27, 2013, 06:41:50 am
Apparently I trust others a lot more than other people here
Post by: Darvi on October 27, 2013, 06:48:30 am
Apparently I trust others a lot more than other people hereI'd call you a schmuck, but I got too much trust in others to do so without being a hypocrite.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 27, 2013, 08:28:19 am
Dat masculinity score. Also, 0 confidence.
Post by: Lagslayer on October 27, 2013, 09:18:32 am
Post by: Graknorke on October 27, 2013, 10:43:14 am
I think I maybe confused it a little bit. Conflicting results yay!
Post by: aenri on October 27, 2013, 10:49:56 am
Post by: scrdest on October 27, 2013, 10:50:55 am
Apparently I'm an Animated Leader (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=XrrEhuoBepSobgb-OK-ACAAD-2b6a&u=3887cb12692c). I took the damn test twice and it gave me that summary both times.
Now excuse me, I have to find some me-time to ROFL.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 27, 2013, 11:17:53 am
Post by: Trapezohedron on October 27, 2013, 11:36:29 am
Post by: werty892 on October 27, 2013, 11:44:17 am
Post by: Guardian G.I. on October 27, 2013, 11:44:27 am
Post by: LordSlowpoke on October 27, 2013, 11:57:51 am
jpeg compression loss
EMPATHY LEVELS: AVERAGE (also generous thinker but the former is more important) (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=LQIcHBHMYUZCJUc-AE-ACAAC-667e&u=9fec2e3866be)
i'm both not masculine and not feminine i should be worried
Post by: scrdest on October 27, 2013, 12:02:29 pm
what the christ is this thread
jpeg compression loss
EMPATHY LEVELS: AVERAGE (also generous thinker but the former is more important) (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=LQIcHBHMYUZCJUc-AE-ACAAC-667e&u=9fec2e3866be)
i'm both not masculine and not feminine i should be worried
I got 8 empathy. 8.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on October 27, 2013, 12:04:49 pm
what the christ is this thread
jpeg compression loss
EMPATHY LEVELS: AVERAGE (also generous thinker but the former is more important) (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=LQIcHBHMYUZCJUc-AE-ACAAC-667e&u=9fec2e3866be)
i'm both not masculine and not feminine i should be worried
I got 8 empathy. 8.
i feel your inability to feel my feeling of your lack of feel-relevant derivatives dude
...wait shit i think i got that wrong
no it looks right
bring me a linguist that sentence's probably broken anyway
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 12:06:18 pm
Expected actually. And I thought I was shy, but Y'all could use some confidence.
Oh man, I only got 24.what the christ is this thread
jpeg compression loss
EMPATHY LEVELS: AVERAGE (also generous thinker but the former is more important) (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=LQIcHBHMYUZCJUc-AE-ACAAC-667e&u=9fec2e3866be)
i'm both not masculine and not feminine i should be worried
I got 8 empathy. 8.
Post by: Darvi on October 27, 2013, 12:08:19 pm
Post by: Graknorke on October 27, 2013, 12:09:46 pm
Post by: scrdest on October 27, 2013, 12:10:09 pm
Two! Two empathy! Ah ah ah!
Bay12's Psychopath Club, represent!
Okay, line up or I'll get crushed. Well, and others too, I guess.
Post by: Oliolli on October 27, 2013, 12:19:03 pm
12 empathy.
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 12:21:53 pm
Well this is the Dwarf Fortress forums. We are not known for our benevolence to little AI dwarves that can't fight back.Two! Two empathy! Ah ah ah!
Bay12's Psychopath Club, represent!
Post by: Graknorke on October 27, 2013, 12:22:48 pm
Post by: Tiruin on October 27, 2013, 12:24:31 pm
Personal DNA (http://www.personaldna.com/)?I love the title of this thread and laughed pretty much too much because of it xD
I'm apparently a "Free-wheeling creator" (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=pWVVSPoTgKLRfUe-HI-DAACA-9bc7&u=6b5603b81978).
Also very masculine and confident etc. BELIEVE IT
...And then I remembered why I like more specific and non-general questions. I keep on thinking 'but this is too subjective!' >_<
*stop looking at it from omnipotent points of view, self :I*
"Oh why don't you try to get this! D:<"
This often ends in sandwiches being made and why I like bread.
So I'm a Respectful Inventor. (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=ZVOSwwBxJKdFHVV-GC-CDCCE-6f5d&u=14f0778d881e)
Aaaand there's a masculinity stat. Yay 2 points? [Oooh dear the labels we attach to gender xD] O_o
Edit: Low empathy?!..Ok wat.
Post by: Sappho on October 27, 2013, 12:44:39 pm
Most of it seems pretty accurate, but since the test is based on what I say about myself, it makes sense that it would reflect my own opinions of myself. I am curious about this "masculinity/femininity" score though. What do they base that on? According to the test, I'm not masculine at all, but highly feminine. On the other hand, most tests I take put me in "analytical/masculine" groups, and I have decidedly masculine mannerisms and body language. Where are they getting femininity from? My high empathy score? Is masculinity linked to aggression and femininity to passivity? Because that's ridiculous.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 27, 2013, 12:50:56 pm
Post by: Tiruin on October 27, 2013, 12:51:44 pm
Generous Thinker (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=HLQxNIBsBBCcBaK-AE-CDBBA-7002&u=5ec8b6657f35)/me punches Sappho in agreement.
Most of it seems pretty accurate, but since the test is based on what I say about myself, it makes sense that it would reflect my own opinions of myself. I am curious about this "masculinity/femininity" score though. What do they base that on? According to the test, I'm not masculine at all, but highly feminine. On the other hand, most tests I take put me in "analytical/masculine" groups, and I have decidedly masculine mannerisms and body language. Where are they getting femininity from? My high empathy score? Is masculinity linked to aggression and femininity to passivity? Because that's ridiculous.
Shoulder-punches! :I
But yeah, hence why I guessed the labels. Femininity = 'softer' side and masculinity = tougher side? There was a question on how 'tough' you are as I remember.
...Wherein I debated with myself what tough meant. Emotionally? Physically? Mentally? In-the-face-of-adversity-and-probable-psychological-trauma-..lly?
And then my low empathy score. T_T
Post by: sjm9876 on October 27, 2013, 12:54:19 pm
Although actually reading the descriptions it seems more fitting.
The glossary seems to give a better picture however.
EDIT: Apart from the empathy score. I've had people mistake me for autistic before.......
Post by: Owlbread on October 27, 2013, 01:03:27 pm
Post by: lue on October 27, 2013, 01:05:35 pm
(Seriously, what kind of idiot came up with the over-engineering that is sliders in flash? I'm suddenly not confident in that site's abilities for some reason...)
Post by: freeformschooler on October 27, 2013, 01:13:36 pm
...Wherein I debated with myself what tough meant. Emotionally? Physically? Mentally? In-the-face-of-adversity-and-probable-psychological-trauma-..lly?
In an ideal world, all people would be tough in at least one but preferably of those senses, so masculinity is a hard concept.
For example, mine (Benevolent Idealist) describes me as more masculine than feminine, (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=eOpsgjtcQMMFOYZ-EO-DDACD-4362&u=89d5e20473e7) but many of the other traits (high empathy in particular) don't sound very masculine at all! This is also the first test that comes up "extrovert" rather than introvert, but the questions for such are rather different than most tests.
I would guess that Masculinity, as defined in this test, is "doing" - leading to people I know just from interacting on the forums (Sappho and MSH, for example) to be very much "doers" coming up with high masculinity scores. This is a surprisingly common criteria of masculinity, but it would kind of imply that to be Feminine is to be a Laid Back Wussy, so it's not exactly universally agreed-upon.
Concerned Analyst (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=iBEMMHuCaIhhRgS-MB-DCACC-f8a4&u=f3e54f1d4bdf)
Expected actually. And I thought I was shy, but Y'all could use some confidence.I got 8 empathy. 8.Oh man, I only got 24.
Do... do you guys need some? I've got plenty to spare.
Post by: Draxis on October 27, 2013, 01:22:48 pm
That actually seems pretty close to the mark, in the deailed descriptions anyway.
Post by: Tiruin on October 27, 2013, 01:27:46 pm
Give me your empathy, or else. :I (:P)Concerned Analyst (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=iBEMMHuCaIhhRgS-MB-DCACC-f8a4&u=f3e54f1d4bdf)
Expected actually. And I thought I was shy, but Y'all could use some confidence.I got 8 empathy. 8.Oh man, I only got 24.
Do... do you guys need some? I've got plenty to spare.
I would guess that Masculinity, as defined in this test, is "doing" - leading to people I know just from interacting on the forums (Sappho and MSH, for example) to be very much "doers" coming up with high masculinity scores. This is a surprisingly common criteria of masculinity, but it would kind of imply that to be Feminine is to be a Laid Back Wussy, so it's not exactly universally agreed-upon.Now I wish they had a defined explanation like how they did the DNA-type (not that I'm saying they did the type wrong-what I got rings with who I see myself...just that their method of arriving at such conclusions is...intriguing, to say the least).
I mean, considering mentality, gender has little say there (only in physiological/anatomical stuff), technically.
Post by: Culise on October 27, 2013, 01:40:15 pm
Chart:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
2 Agency and Confidence, 72 Empathy, and 100 Trust. Apparently, I'm also very androgynous with a side of asexuality, with very low but similar masculinity and femininity scores. I think my scores in general are a little...extreme. I think, by and large, certain aspects do seem to be rather accurate. However, this made me laugh quite a bit.
Quote
Because other people would benefit immensely from your understanding and insight, you should try to be more outgoing in social situations, even when they make you uncomfortable. Others will want to hear what you have to say!"Uncomfortable" is probably the only accurate part of that. ^_^
Post by: RedWarrior0 on October 27, 2013, 01:49:21 pm
That might just be your uberlow confidence talking.QuoteBecause other people would benefit immensely from your understanding and insight, you should try to be more outgoing in social situations, even when they make you uncomfortable. Others will want to hear what you have to say!"Uncomfortable" is probably the only accurate part of that. ^_^
I do have to say, some of the answering methods were quite interesting.
Post by: Tarran on October 27, 2013, 02:02:34 pm
Interesting to see my Aesthetic value. Would've expected it to be a little more balanced.
Post by: Itnetlolor on October 27, 2013, 02:03:58 pm
Generous Analyst (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=fFIkBBuXPTHbHVU-ME-DDACC-c790&u=539387b45257)
Spoiler: Chart (click to show/hide)
This is despite the fact that I live on a zero-trust policy with people and social situations, and even when good things happen (E.G.- If an attractive girl takes interest in me, I can think up a number of scenarios that I might end up captured, killed, or left for broke; Why? Because this is reality, and as 'All-Powerful' and 'All-Loving' God tends to be, he's not THAT kind; not to mention, Fate/Destiny is a bitch in sheep's clothing with a terrible case of bipolar disorder. Surprisingly enough, you guys rank pretty high in my trust, but everyone else IRL locally, I tend to call BS on alot of their claims; even compliments about me, mostly due to the fact that as much of a catch I am complemented on being, I get no help at all when it comes to hookups, especially since it's near-impossible for me to hookup with anyone, or to even work up the motivation to bother anymore (I'm oddly proud enough to say I gave up on dating)), and the fact that I prefer to do things for myself, and especially by myself, because I can only trust myself to get it done properly, and quickly. Naturally, this doesn't make me a good team player, and pisses authority off alot when I go about on my own when left idle, because I don't like to waste time that otherwise could be spent getting a job done in a few hours, instead of a ton of them. Naturally, this could also lead me to break myself mentally, spiritually, and even physically in the process; don't be too surprised when you witness me dislocate my arm while on the job, relocate it myself, and continue to finish it in slightly less pain (IE- Berserker mode activates).
Spoiler: Gets a bit ranty here (click to show/hide)
Post by: freeformschooler on October 27, 2013, 02:07:36 pm
Apparently I'm a Generous Curator (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=KILeYDRIRaInqcc-JE-CAAAC-cdb4&u=5907de3c8da4). I guess that's okay and might possibly be correct.
Interesting to see my Aesthetic value. Would've expected it to be a little more balanced.
Goodness you guys need some confidence too :P
It's important to remember that even if you agree with your result on a BS personality test, it's just a snapshot. The you today is not necessarily to you of 12 or even 8 months from now. Would be interesting to do something like this multiple times over years to guage change in, at least, how you view yourself.
no help at all when it comes to hookups, especially since it's near-impossible for me to hookup with anyone, or to even work up the motivation to bother anymore (I'm oddly proud enough to say I gave up on dating)
Why would one need help for "hookups?" Or am I misunderstanding? It seems kind of the point that to ask someone out and get solely their attention, you would need to muster up the brain grease to do it yourself rather than hide behind a buffer or, worse, wait for one to hide behind.
Post by: RedWarrior0 on October 27, 2013, 02:08:32 pm
How you deal with others:
12 Generous
7 Considerate
3 Reserved
2 Cautious
2 Respectful
1 Free-wheeling
1 Genuine
1 Concerned
1 Animated
1 Advocating
1 Benevolent
That is an impressive array of adjectives
About us:
7 Experiencer
6 Analyst
3 Idealist
3 Leader
2 Creator
2 Realist
2 Thinker
2 Inventor
1 Artist
1 Builder
1 Dreamer
1 Visionary
1 Curator
So it seems the average B12er is a Generous Experiencer. Considerate Experiencer, Generous Analyst, and Considerate Analyst are close behind.
Edit: Clicking Misko's link shows he is a cautious analyst, not concerned.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 27, 2013, 02:11:05 pm
Speaking of that, has anyone else managed a score of 0 in anything?
Post by: Darvi on October 27, 2013, 02:17:45 pm
Post by: Sappho on October 27, 2013, 02:25:16 pm
I also noticed that a lot of the questions are almost identical to autism screening questions. I am autistic, so I can't help but wonder if that was intentional, or whether the possibility of something like autism was factored into the test.
I generally take online quizzes and tests with a laugh and a grain of salt, but when they claim to be scientifically based and offer genuine insight into someone's personality, I expect them to at least back up their science and prove that they know what they're talking about.
Post by: Solifuge on October 27, 2013, 02:28:30 pm
Spoiler: Ze chart (click to show/hide)
The Gist:
Inventor: Seeking New Things + Creativity + Problem Solving
Considerate: Trusting + Idealist + Observant
Traits: Fairly high femininity, very high empathy, trust, and openness, average masculinity and spontaneity, and pretty much no obedience/adherence to authority.
Also, they have definitions for the traits; click the Glossary of Terms hotlink on the results page. Femininity and Masculinity are based on "adherence to female/male stereotypes", so it's probably corollary to different questions related to traditional feminine/masculine behavior.
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 02:29:29 pm
Pff. Confidence. Who needs it?My openness is a 2, so almost.
Speaking of that, has anyone else managed a score of 0 in anything?
[-snip-Hmm. Yes, I see. The world has wronged you, and that bitterness is strong.
Quote from: Meet the Robinsons
Everyone will tell you to let it go and move on, but don't! Instead, let it fester and boil inside of you! Take these feelings and lock them away. Let them fuel your actions. Let hate be your ally, and you will be capable of wonderfully horrid things.I do love that quote.
Quote
The more I think about this masculine/feminine rating, the more distrustful I am of the results of this test and the entire theory behind it. If they are declaring whether someone is masculine or feminine without even revealing to us what they think that means, they might as well just be pulling their descriptions out of thin air. At the very least they ought to explain what they mean by that. By all accounts I am highly masculine, other than physical strength and "dominance," and if that's what they're going off of, then I disagree with their philosophy from the start. The implication seems to be that masculine = strong and forceful, feminine = passive and weak. In fact, I don't mind them classifying me as passive and weak, but I *do* mind them linking that to "femininity."Demanding Science and evidence from a free online test is a little silly.
I also noticed that a lot of the questions are almost identical to autism screening questions. I am autistic, so I can't help but wonder if that was intentional, or whether the possibility of something like autism was factored into the test.
I generally take online quizzes and tests with a laugh and a grain of salt, but when they claim to be scientifically based and offer genuine insight into someone's personality, I expect them to at least back up their science and prove that they know what they're talking about.
Post by: Dutchling on October 27, 2013, 02:29:51 pm
What the hell. How does that even work >.<
Post by: Itnetlolor on October 27, 2013, 02:30:13 pm
When you're as unlucky with the ladies as I am, you need help (E.G.- From friends, associates, family friends and so forth, and 6-degrees of separation. Naturally, everyone that has succeeded and are happily married are shit at this job (none of their advice works; that or I'm some sort of opposing frequency where actually bad advice is good advice for me, and vice-versa. Maybe I need to apply the negative, since that has reliably been providing positive results, whereas the opposite has been the same (kinda like how I have practical pessimism, and optimism just invites bad luck to ambush me from all angles)).). I've broadcasted an S.O.S. for so long, I shut it off to conserve power since I've wasted enough energy asking for help for a considerable amount of time (matters made worse since there's a crapload of people that could help (my siblings have plenty of friends and connections), but won't or think I'm speaking in another untranslatable language). Basically, I'm drifting in space in solitude waiting for something interesting to happen.no help at all when it comes to hookups, especially since it's near-impossible for me to hookup with anyone, or to even work up the motivation to bother anymore (I'm oddly proud enough to say I gave up on dating)Why would one need help for "hookups?" Or am I misunderstanding? It seems kind of the point that to ask someone out and get solely their attention, you would need to muster up the brain grease to do it yourself rather than hide behind a buffer or, worse, wait for one to hide behind.
When that something interesting happens (basically devoting myself to random chance), I'll decide whether or not to strike. Simply put, it's in God's hands, and if even my Lord won't lend me a hand, fuck it all; celibacy it is. Just when I'm expected to help (after being denied it for so long), I'm charging a fortune for my services.
Post by: MonkeyHead on October 27, 2013, 02:30:41 pm
Pff. Confidence. Who needs it?
Speaking of that, has anyone else managed a score of 0 in anything?
I too scored zero femeninity, whatever the hell that is supposed to mean. I suspect that this measure is as crude as selecting male as your gender than putting some weight behind responses linked to agression and minimal weight to emotional responses - harldy a fair way of calculating something as ill defined as masculine/femenine balance, and highly likley to be based on seeing how many aspects of a stereotype you display..
Other noteable lows were 2's in confidence, Attention to style and Aesthetic/functional (maximum functionality).
Post by: Dutchling on October 27, 2013, 02:32:35 pm
Speaking of that, has anyone else managed a score of 0 in anything?I have 0 femininity :v.
Also 2 attention to style. I'm not sure how I feel about that >.>
Post by: RedWarrior0 on October 27, 2013, 02:35:19 pm
Post by: Darvi on October 27, 2013, 02:37:08 pm
I have 0 femininity :v.I would say that we were manbros now, but I only have mediocre masculinity :V
Post by: freeformschooler on October 27, 2013, 02:38:19 pm
When you're as unlucky with the ladies as I am, you need help (friends, associates, family friends and so forth, and 6-degrees of separation). I've broadcasted an S.O.S. for so long, I shut it off to conserve power since I've wasted enough energy asking for help for a considerable amount of time (matters made worse since there's a crapload of people that could help (my siblings have plenty of friends and connections), but won't or think I'm speaking in another untranslatable language). Basically, I'm drifting in space in solitude waiting for something interesting to happen.no help at all when it comes to hookups, especially since it's near-impossible for me to hookup with anyone, or to even work up the motivation to bother anymore (I'm oddly proud enough to say I gave up on dating)Why would one need help for "hookups?" Or am I misunderstanding? It seems kind of the point that to ask someone out and get solely their attention, you would need to muster up the brain grease to do it yourself rather than hide behind a buffer or, worse, wait for one to hide behind.
When that something interesting happens (basically devoting myself to random chance), I'll decide whether or not to strike. Simply put, it's in God's hands, and if even my Lord won't lend me a hand, fuck it all; celibacy it is. Just when I'm expected to help (after being denied it for so long), I'm charging a fortune for my services.
Hmm, okay. Get what you're saying, but we have very different views about this thing. You believe something like "if it's going to happen, it's going to happen" while I believe something like "if you build it, they will come."
Although I believe tests like this are mostly bullshit, it's interesting to note that our results of Idealist vs Analyst exemplify exactly this.
I think, beyond the gender nonsense, what bugged me the most was/were the question(s) regarding political slant. Personally, I find it revolting to define my own characteristics based the two-way standings of two very flawed political entities. There's so much about politics and even people as we are that cannot be described on a two-dimensional plot.
Seriously, screw political association.
Logical solution: put the dot in the absolute middle and it will not affect your results at all, similar to "no opinion."
Post by: Dutchling on October 27, 2013, 02:39:08 pm
I, with my 2 trust in others, will assume you just lied. I'm on to you bro.I have 0 femininity :v.I would say that we were manbros now, but I only have mediocre masculinity :V
Also, I suggest we all do this other test (http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Smashing_415d87_2267808.gif).
Post by: Itnetlolor on October 27, 2013, 02:49:40 pm
Like I have taken things on from a broad perspective (overly broad at times to the point of indiscriminate, and being a tad on the aggressive as well), but when it comes to the emotional aspects and whatnot, my rational mind also tends to take a hit and I end up ranting about it semi-uncontrollably (I have to re-read some of what I post before I make a complete ass of myself), and eventually becoming a bit harsh on some angles, and pinpointing my strikes, despite being more indiscriminate at most times. As far as I'm concerned, in order of mention, I was describing masculine mindset and then the feminine mindset, from my perspective.
At a 2:1 ratio of masucline:feminine thinking, I think anything involving romance and social stuff (including politics, and especially the unrealistic nature of Rom-Coms and how people actually think/fall for the "fact" that crap actually works IRL), is pretty much a berserk button for me emotionally, and should never be a topic for me to be involved in, as my recent posts have shown. As personal advice for myself, I think it best I stay out of anything romance-related for a long time. I mean, masculine observation with a feminine outset on those subjects is like water and sodium. No matter how I go about it, we've got fireworks.
EDIT: @Naxza
92 Masculine, 46 Feminine is a flat 2:1 ratio.
EDIT EDIT:
In an additional hindsight, now I come and think of it, I think God "Ender's Game"d me. I mean, looking at all I am capable of doing and how I am able to handle things (to the point I would actually make a competent supervillain and such if I actually put my mind and pooled some resources into it), and still somehow be a good person in the whole process (again, anti-hero; or a benevolent Sith)... I have pretty much turned into Ender. Kinda makes sense that my brother mentioned something about how that book series reminded him of me. All things considered, nothing scares me anymore (in a conventional sense, at least; besides humans, we're FUBAR), and I have a rather lateral way of handling things that even my lateral thinking is lateral in itself. Let's just say my finest plans will even confuse me at some points; although that gambit is part of the plan (in a sense, part of my plan involves me losing touch with the plan I made myself).
Post by: Solifuge on October 27, 2013, 02:51:57 pm
I think the masculine/feminine thing is along the lines of thinking patterns.
...Also, they have definitions for the traits; click the Glossary of Terms hotlink on the results page. Femininity and Masculinity are based on "adherence to female/male stereotypes", so it's probably corollary to different questions related to traditional feminine/masculine behavior.
I think that was missed in the post storm.
Post by: Putnam on October 27, 2013, 03:13:40 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 27, 2013, 03:15:21 pm
Benevolent Leader (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=cenmnjsBRDBcDiT-OO-ACABD-c77a&u=84812300bc66)Kim Jong-Un detected.
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 03:21:21 pm
Benevolent Leader (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=cenmnjsBRDBcDiT-OO-ACABD-c77a&u=84812300bc66)ALL HAIL SUPREME LEADER. HE GRACES US WITH HIS PRESENCE.
Post by: Jelle on October 27, 2013, 03:50:37 pm
You are a Reserved Experiencer. (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=CUDJAYxCqVVLJcc-CA-DCDCA-3bad&u=96379d5853ba)
Your inquisitive nature, imagination, and hands-on practicality make you an EXPERIENCER. Odd name but true enough.
You are willing to experiment to find things that work the most efficiently. Yep
Getting stuck in certain habits is boring to you—you'd rather find new experiences. Not really, pretty neutral there.
Your vision of the world is complex – your values are not set in stone. Instead, you are able to change your beliefs as you learn new information. Spot on
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Trust is rock bottom. Should come as no surprise I suppose, I do genuinly distrust and see the worst in people.
Post by: Dutchling on October 27, 2013, 03:52:05 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on October 27, 2013, 03:55:52 pm
Trust is rock bottom. Should come as no surprise I suppose, I do genuinly distrust and see the worst in people.
You are a Reserved Experiencer. (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=CUDJAYxCqVVLJcc-CA-DCDCA-3bad&u=96379d5853ba)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MonkeyHead on October 27, 2013, 04:27:15 pm
98 masculinity? Do you ooze steroids or what o.O?
I got 100 masculinity. Quiver in awe of my massive gonads!
Post by: Owlbread on October 27, 2013, 04:31:37 pm
I got 100 masculinity. Quiver in awe of my massive gonads!
I had about 20 masculinity. I suppose this means I am actually a woman or something.
Post by: Descan on October 27, 2013, 04:50:56 pm
Post by: sjm9876 on October 27, 2013, 04:58:40 pm
Though I find the fact that I'm classified as Generous amusing considering my trust score of 4. Whoo social paranoia!
Post by: Owlbread on October 27, 2013, 05:00:10 pm
Post by: Descan on October 27, 2013, 05:00:53 pm
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 05:05:01 pm
Yeah, you're just a Scot who wears pants.Shots fired.
Here's me biting.And yet you are such a open person. It's your only weakness. Strive to close yourself from the world.
You are a Reserved Experiencer. (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=CUDJAYxCqVVLJcc-CA-DCDCA-3bad&u=96379d5853ba)
Your inquisitive nature, imagination, and hands-on practicality make you an EXPERIENCER. Odd name but true enough.
You are willing to experiment to find things that work the most efficiently. Yep
Getting stuck in certain habits is boring to you—you'd rather find new experiences. Not really, pretty neutral there.
Your vision of the world is complex – your values are not set in stone. Instead, you are able to change your beliefs as you learn new information. Spot onI'm da man!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Trust is rock bottom. Should come as no surprise I suppose, I do genuinly distrust and see the worst in people.
Post by: Detonate on October 27, 2013, 05:28:07 pm
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 05:34:14 pm
I'm a benevolent director. (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=vsyuquMSoxBZxYd-PO-CADDD-d571&u=e5165018e040) I thought it was a Benevolent Dictator but it turned out to be director. That 100% extroversion and 92% empathy, tho. Still no idea what agency is.Making decision. Act now, act decisively, act forcefully, but act now.
Post by: Putnam on October 27, 2013, 05:39:58 pm
Post by: Xantalos on October 27, 2013, 06:31:41 pm
Huh. No idea what that means, but I'm neither.
Post by: Dutchling on October 27, 2013, 06:52:53 pm
I'm apparently a Generous Idealist.You're the guy who keeps voting for corrupt politicians.
Huh. No idea what that means, but I'm neither.
Post by: Xantalos on October 27, 2013, 06:53:32 pm
No, I'm the one who keepsI'm apparently a Generous Idealist.You're the guy who keeps voting for corrupt politicians.
Huh. No idea what that means, but I'm neither.
Post by: misko27 on October 27, 2013, 07:04:24 pm
Post by: fivex on October 27, 2013, 07:07:58 pm
The only bars over 30 are Empathy and Spontaneity.
Post by: Xantalos on October 27, 2013, 07:09:17 pm
The descriptions make a lot more sense if you read the specifics. Otherwise you get strange things like actually being Kim Jung Un.Which none of us totally are, ho ho ho!~
Post by: Eagle_eye on October 27, 2013, 08:35:34 pm
"Your awareness of those around you, along with your nuanced perceptions of the world at large, makes you the GENEROUS person that you are. "
"are reluctant to pass judgments on others. "
"appreciation for different perspectives and opinions"
Yeah, no, something's not right here.
Post by: Tiruin on October 27, 2013, 08:43:40 pm
The more I think about this masculine/feminine rating, the more distrustful I am of the results of this test and the entire theory behind it.[...]
[...]...I'm now siding with Sappho here. That's pretty cheap seeing that 'adhering to stereotype' (emphasis, STEREOTYPE, instead of treating the personhood as is) looks like a better idea to rate than not (though, it does give...an 'idea' of how a person is.) I mean, what if I'm male? :O
Also, they have definitions for the traits; click the Glossary of Terms hotlink on the results page. Femininity and Masculinity are based on "adherence to female/male stereotypes", so it's probably corollary to different questions related to traditional feminine/masculine behavior.
Post by: Itnetlolor on October 27, 2013, 09:00:53 pm
For example, you can have a very masculine female (or basically someone you wouldn't want to piss off that might also be able to out-drink you in a drinking contest (Male > Female, by a margin of 50-75), and you can have rather effeminate (straight) males that are "Metro-sexual" breeds or something of the sort (same margin, swap points). As far as I can tell, based on your familiarity of said stereotypes, it can or can't be accurate. Minor bias as to how much of said stereotype you understand or have observed.
I, of course, state the potential bias due to the fact that one could be around very masculine women and account that as a norm of feminine behaviors, and same with the masculine like I stated before for a majority of their lives, and thus bias their results due to their familiarity being different than the majority norm. But all that aside, I think they're counting on familiarity of said stereotypes based on the majority (Feminine = Barbie, Masculine = Hot Wheels, so to put it) as the basis of the norms being used.
EDIT:
Basically, at least from what I've observed, even with my own stats (see previous post for how I analyzed it), I think I did a fair assessment of what mine meant. Of course, my margins are on a high-level (near-maxed out on masculine, and halfway feminine). If you lack male and female stereotypes, you could be a spambot, though that could be a stereotype of autonomous beings, and be offensive to Skynet.
Post by: Descan on October 27, 2013, 09:24:21 pm
... Or is it Golden Girls? Bah, I always get them mixed up.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 27, 2013, 09:35:58 pm
Post by: Sappho on October 28, 2013, 03:20:55 am
The more I think about this masculine/feminine rating, the more distrustful I am of the results of this test and the entire theory behind it.[...][...]...I'm now siding with Sappho here. That's pretty cheap seeing that 'adhering to stereotype' (emphasis, STEREOTYPE, instead of treating the personhood as is) looks like a better idea to rate than not (though, it does give...an 'idea' of how a person is.) I mean, what if I'm male? :O
Also, they have definitions for the traits; click the Glossary of Terms hotlink on the results page. Femininity and Masculinity are based on "adherence to female/male stereotypes", so it's probably corollary to different questions related to traditional feminine/masculine behavior.
So they say it's based on "stereotypes" but they DON'T DEFINE what they think those stereotypes are. And I can't figure out how the hell they say I have 2 masculinity but 88 femininity. I'm a bisexual female who only just recently gave into pressure to wear women's clothing. Before that I always wore boys' clothing and kept my hair short - I looked like a 12-year-old boy. In relationships with women I tend to assume a more stereotypically "masculine" role. I have never worn makeup or heels or tight clothing (even my new "women's" clothing looks pretty much the same as my old boys' stuff) and my body language is distinctly masculine. I don't care what I look like as long as I'm comfortable. when I was a kid, I played outside, climbed trees, and played with bugs. I always wanted to play boys' games and refused to partake in things like field hockey and gymnastics because I thought they were too girly.
The only thing I can think of that they would use as a basis for calling me "feminine" is that I'm shy and quiet, and not dominant or pushy towards other people. In what universe is that the definition of "feminine"? How is that not an insult? Furthermore, what place does such a rating have on a test like this? Who is taking this test going "I wonder how well I adhere to the particular gender stereotypes held by the writers of this test, even though I don't know which stereotypes they're using?"
I might re-take this little test and set my gender as male at the beginning, then give all the same answers, to see if that influences their results.
As for the existence of stereotypes, I actually have a lot of ideas about that, though it's not related to this thread so I'll spoiler it:
Spoiler: Stereotypes and the Human Mind (click to show/hide)
Post by: scrdest on October 28, 2013, 06:45:56 am
The more I think about this masculine/feminine rating, the more distrustful I am of the results of this test and the entire theory behind it.[...][...]...I'm now siding with Sappho here. That's pretty cheap seeing that 'adhering to stereotype' (emphasis, STEREOTYPE, instead of treating the personhood as is) looks like a better idea to rate than not (though, it does give...an 'idea' of how a person is.) I mean, what if I'm male? :O
Also, they have definitions for the traits; click the Glossary of Terms hotlink on the results page. Femininity and Masculinity are based on "adherence to female/male stereotypes", so it's probably corollary to different questions related to traditional feminine/masculine behavior.
So they say it's based on "stereotypes" but they DON'T DEFINE what they think those stereotypes are.
The only thing I can think of that they would use as a basis for calling me "feminine" is that I'm shy and quiet, and not dominant or pushy towards other people. In what universe is that the definition of "feminine"? How is that not an insult? Furthermore, what place does such a rating have on a test like this? Who is taking this test going "I wonder how well I adhere to the particular gender stereotypes held by the writers of this test, even though I don't know which stereotypes they're using?"
I might re-take this little test and set my gender as male at the beginning, then give all the same answers, to see if that influences their results.
I suspect the idea is as follows:
Masculinity is mostly based on high Agency, Confidence and Functional score
Feminity is mostly based on high Empathy, Trust and Attention to Style score
I wonder what happens when you change the gender at the beginning, though.
Post by: Sappho on October 28, 2013, 06:48:48 am
Post by: scrdest on October 28, 2013, 06:55:12 am
Nope, it can't be that. I have high empathy but trust and attention to style are almost at 0.
rand(0,100)?
Post by: misko27 on October 28, 2013, 07:52:53 am
People have been getting rather consistently high masculinity scores that would disprove that.Nope, it can't be that. I have high empathy but trust and attention to style are almost at 0.
rand(0,100)?
Post by: Skyrunner on October 28, 2013, 07:56:50 am
And to put a chip on the traits thing, I have low masculinity AND femininity!
Post by: scrdest on October 28, 2013, 07:57:11 am
People have been getting rather consistently high masculinity scores that would disprove that.Nope, it can't be that. I have high empathy but trust and attention to style are almost at 0.
rand(0,100)?
I know, I'm just joking.
Post by: Skyrunner on October 28, 2013, 07:57:58 am
I know, I'm just joking.People have been getting rather consistently high masculinity scores that would disprove that.Nope, it can't be that. I have high empathy but trust and attention to style are almost at 0.
rand(0,100)?
Well, that could be worked around by making it a hash function that makes the answer set into a hash and creates a score from that...
Post by: Tiruin on October 28, 2013, 09:00:08 am
I am a Concerned Realist. (http://www.personaldna.com/report.php?k=HBNsMQJOIJvnDdV-IF-AACCA-8d49&u=5c7383b09ab7)D:< My unreferenced metaphor still stands!! Rawr!
And to put a chip on the traits thing, I have low masculinity AND femininity!SEE TIRUIN I'M A REALIST >:D
Also those scores O_o Skynet alert!
I suspect the idea is as follows:Dohohohohohohohoho (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78290.msg4720204#msg4720204) let's check shall we?
Masculinity is mostly based on high Agency, Confidence and Functional score
Feminity is mostly based on high Empathy, Trust and Attention to Style score
I wonder what happens when you change the gender at the beginning, though.
Nope. :O
Though I did pick in Female there, I figure it takes in that choice and...skews it? >_>
Anywhoo, did a check again and..yeah, Sappho hits the nail on the head. I mean, the test does take in characteristics which jive with the person, but its system of how to determine them..well, in my opinion, is too easy to screw up.
Slider Bar: How Tough are you? A chart seemed better for that (physical//mental//emotional...)
But the most part is that gender note. I'd lay it easy and stab it as 'bad choice in a good plan'. I mean, heck, 98 Femininity/2 Masculinity? I've always loved 'boy' clothing more than not, and favored practicable clothing (warmth, covering..it's pretty cold where I am) and am wholly a sports(wo)man. Physical contact sports ftw! :I That, and I believe the femininity-part comes in when I can easily relate to others, maybe? Caring and stuff like that? Meek and..respectful-ish?
Bleh. If that's not Masculinity, then men are mean meanie-people who do silent telepathic talks to settle their problems. Which is obviously not true; I stand by my past note that people are generally mentality-ly equal.
Stereotypes are dumb. The fact that they exist confirm my near constant thought that humans are largely dumb. Which is a stereotype. Dammit....This too, shortened. I believe the only good reason they put that thing in there is so that people will get the label placed on it and not..err, interpret themselves as said stereotype. Yet it differs in culture..I think it goes along Western culture more? Here, male/female stereotypes are more along..well, on a shallower note, nearing equality, as far as I know. Still...
Nice work stereotyping my DNA! Now my genes will forever be oppressed!
Or we think too much on that note. xD Though..I now get that these tests are only able to give or guide you to see how much of x, y or z you are given how we (in general) tend to reflect on them and compare to what we know of them.
Though, its a good site to say the least.
Quote
You have fewer friendships than some, but the relationships you do have are very meaningful and important to you.Are one of the few things I remember truly about myself..considering what I look up on the net (http://www.ohmz.net/2013/01/13/counting-stars/) and usually cry with in seeing the beauty.
Post by: Sappho on October 28, 2013, 09:16:38 am
Post by: Graknorke on October 28, 2013, 09:38:08 am
Bleh. If that's not Masculinity, then men are mean meanie-people who do silent telepathic talks to settle their problems. Which is obviously not true*sidles out of door*
Post by: Digital Hellhound on October 28, 2013, 09:45:02 am
Post by: Dutchling on October 28, 2013, 09:47:05 am
I'm a Considerate Visionary. I think these traits actually fit me pretty well, so nice test.Had you considered envisioning this result beforehand?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on October 28, 2013, 10:05:42 am
Bleh. If that's not Masculinity, then men are mean meanie-people who do silent telepathic talks to settle their problems.Is this not how you accomplish things?
Which is obviously not true; I stand by my past note that people are generally mentality-ly equal.I don't understand this sentence but I think I disagree with it a lot.
There should be a special circle in hell for puns that bad.I'm a Considerate Visionary. I think these traits actually fit me pretty well, so nice test.Had you considered envisioning this result beforehand?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jelle on October 28, 2013, 10:22:53 am
So I think high masculinity paints a pretty good picture in my case, even though I don't consider myself particularly macho. In fact as far as manliness is concerned I'm probably on the lower end of the spectrum.
Hmm I think I'm missing the reference here. As far as looks go that's not to far off though, just not quite as handsome. :DSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lagslayer on October 28, 2013, 11:45:15 am
It's Mulder from the TV show The X-Files. It's fantastic. You need to check it out.Hmm I think I'm missing the reference here. As far as looks go that's not to far off though, just not quite as handsome. :DSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Itnetlolor on October 28, 2013, 03:03:39 pm
Post by: RedWarrior0 on October 28, 2013, 04:46:52 pm
Post by: misko27 on October 28, 2013, 06:10:06 pm
Oh, and the Contact Us page is somewhat sketchy. The captcha is a static image. Also, every time I submit feedback, it says there's a problem with it.Clearly they are a front for a radical organization seeking to take over the world and starting by reinforcing Masculine/Feminine stereotypes.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 01, 2013, 03:47:32 pm
Spoiler: Last Poll (click to show/hide)
Are you enlightened into the mysteries of the lizard Illuminati? (http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/10/how-spot-reptilians-runing-us-government/71020/) It's just a formality of course, us ivory tower intellectual elites are obviously all reptilians.
Post by: Darvi on November 01, 2013, 03:50:13 pm
Post by: Sappho on November 01, 2013, 03:51:06 pm
Hmmmmm.....
Quote
Yes, you are a reptilian.
Or have reptilian-compatible bloodlines or whatever. And here you were worried about a Halloween costume.
Post by: Darvi on November 01, 2013, 03:54:38 pm
I'll cover for you, buddy.
Post by: Sappho on November 01, 2013, 03:56:45 pm
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...........
Post by: Darvi on November 01, 2013, 03:58:03 pm
Post by: Bdthemag on November 01, 2013, 04:01:12 pm
Anyway, doesn't anyone in the US watch Doctor Who? Everyone knows the reptilians aren't from space, they're from earth. They've just been hiding deep underground for millenia waiting for the earth to become habitable again. Which it has.How do you know all of this? Would you perhaps happen to be a lizard?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm...........
Post by: Sappho on November 01, 2013, 04:04:01 pm
Post by: sjm9876 on November 01, 2013, 04:05:01 pm
And please use logic here people. We are in control. And because you foolish humans do not believe anything you are told by your superiors, all we need to do is tell you to look exactly where we are.
Post by: Darvi on November 01, 2013, 04:11:36 pm
Post by: sjm9876 on November 01, 2013, 04:16:33 pm
Post by: Darvi on November 01, 2013, 04:18:27 pm
Post by: Descan on November 01, 2013, 04:20:02 pm
Nothing to cut!
Post by: sjm9876 on November 01, 2013, 04:45:57 pm
Post by: Graknorke on November 01, 2013, 04:50:46 pm
Post by: Haspen on November 01, 2013, 04:58:09 pm
/me hisses contentedly at other reptilians v:
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 01, 2013, 05:00:23 pm
Physic-- The art of healing diseases; the science of medicine; the theory or practice of medicine.
So I would assume it would mean rapid-healing abilities. For that, I say yes, I heal absurdly fast, especially in a berserker rage.
In those regards, RAWR!
And also, I assume people of Irish descent are apparently lizards/reptiles. But then, who was cast off by St. Patrick, since they were reptiles as well (snakes)?
I suppose the reptilian traits do apply to me somewhat. Low pressure systems come in along with some rain, and I fall asleep easier. During the Winter, I prefer to hibernate, and I bask in the sun when I have a chance.
EDIT:
Yeah, Physic abilities, and ESP are two different things; being both the same meaning in that chart is incorrect. Physic would be regeneration and and double-jointed flexibility, and ESP is the psychic part.
Post by: Descan on November 01, 2013, 05:02:31 pm
Post by: Solifuge on November 01, 2013, 05:03:54 pm
The Reptilians are clearly trying to seek refuge in audacity by creating this "test". But I'm on to them.
Post by: da_nang on November 01, 2013, 05:07:03 pm
/me looks at his avatar.
Yep, sure am. But you saw nothing.
/me casts Command Humanoid and Chameleon.
Post by: alexandertnt on November 01, 2013, 05:16:03 pm
*Notices avatar* Hmmm...
Post by: Powder Miner on November 01, 2013, 05:17:26 pm
Let not the foolish humans know of our plots, you fools. The king will have us executed if you reveal our secrets to the ants!
Post by: misko27 on November 01, 2013, 05:40:27 pm
Post by: Graknorke on November 01, 2013, 05:42:49 pm
Reptiles everywhere, in every level of government, and even our own forum! They must be purged.Turn off the central heating?
Post by: ECrownofFire on November 01, 2013, 05:51:46 pm
5.*Cough*
*Notices avatar* Hmmm...
Anyway, I actually had green eyes until I was 3, then they changed to brown. I got 6-7 ish total, depending on what counts (of course since we're talking about conspiracy theories, everything counts).
(By the way, it says you're a reptilian even if you get zero :P)
Post by: Darvi on November 01, 2013, 05:54:45 pm
(By the way, it says you're a reptilian even if you get zero :P)Yep. Which is why we know that six people are lying liars that lie.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 01, 2013, 06:06:43 pm
Anyway, I actually had green eyes until I was 3, then they changed to brown. I got 6-7 ish total, depending on what counts (of course since we're talking about conspiracy theories, everything counts).My eyes shift between green and blue to this very day. It's unfortunate, because they took a sharp turn towards green in the past couple years, and my ID says they're blue. Though it remains ambiguous, they're now definitely more green than blue.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on November 02, 2013, 12:27:05 am
Post by: Tiruin on November 03, 2013, 05:28:22 am
Are you enlightened into the mysteries of the lizard Illuminati? (http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/10/how-spot-reptilians-runing-us-government/71020/) It's just a formality of course, us ivory tower intellectual elites are obviously all reptilians.
If you answer all of them, some of them, or none of them, it still says you're a Reptilian....I've never known about this. And not being American anyways-
The Reptilians are clearly trying to seek refuge in audacity by creating this "test". But I'm on to them.
Quote from: Result
> Deep compassion for fate of humankind...Riiight.
> ESP (+)
> Keensight orhearing
> Love space & science
Yes, you are a reptilian.
Or have reptilian-compatible bloodlines or whatever. And here you were worried about a Halloween costume.
Post by: werty892 on November 03, 2013, 10:27:54 am
Post by: scrdest on November 03, 2013, 10:51:00 am
"capability to disrupt electrical appliances"
I can do that. It involves a hammer.
You damn aliens with your damn alien technology!
Post by: Helgoland on November 03, 2013, 11:04:34 am
Do we have scaly Mexican immigrants here?"capability to disrupt electrical appliances"
I can do that. It involves a hammer.
You damn aliens with your damn alien technology!
Post by: hops on November 03, 2013, 08:44:55 pm
But despite that...
Quote
Yes, you are a reptilian.
Or have reptilian-compatible bloodlines or whatever. And here you were worried about a Halloween costume.
Post by: Eagle_eye on November 11, 2013, 09:17:20 pm
Apparently I'm a whining rotter.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 11, 2013, 09:23:30 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
1.76, whining rotter extraordinaire.
Post by: Bouchart on November 11, 2013, 09:29:23 pm
Post by: Frumple on November 11, 2013, 09:31:18 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on November 11, 2013, 09:34:53 pm
Post by: Bdthemag on November 11, 2013, 09:35:53 pm
Post by: misko27 on November 11, 2013, 09:37:58 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 11, 2013, 09:41:04 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2013, 09:43:42 pm
You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.
'Freedom.
Post by: Bdthemag on November 11, 2013, 09:43:50 pm
My god, you all really are one minor disaster away from sanctioning the dissolution of all freedom and human rights. Maybe I should have joined a survivalist commune after all.Survival commune, citizen? Would you perhaps be willing to discuss the location of the previously mentioned commune, along with a list any members or potential members involved in it? Just in case I decide to join, of course.
Post by: Karlito on November 11, 2013, 09:51:06 pm
Post by: misko27 on November 11, 2013, 09:52:00 pm
Quote
The overall average score for groups tested in the original study is listed in the 1950 publication as 3.84, with men averaging somewhat higher and women somewhat lower.Of course, it doesn't mention what you score highly on, whether you score highly on conventional-ism but lowly on Superstitious beliefs, or are low on the sex-concerned aspects but high on on Cynicism.
And safety's sake.My god, you all really are one minor disaster away from sanctioning the dissolution of all freedom and human rights. Maybe I should have joined a survivalist commune after all.Survival commune, citizen? Would you perhaps be willing to discuss the location of the previously mentioned commune, along with a list any members or potential members involved in it? Just in case I decide to join, of course.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on November 11, 2013, 09:54:57 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2013, 09:57:30 pm
Liberal airhead. Some of those questions (like the one about homosexuality) are definitely pretty dated, though. I'm not a fascist, but I'm certainly a left-wing, social-capitalist, anti-democrat.It is using 1950's standards in Murrica.
Post by: Lagslayer on November 11, 2013, 10:04:23 pm
Post by: Vector on November 11, 2013, 10:08:14 pm
Apparently I'm a fascist if I think some people are genetically predisposed to depression, and I have a healthy respect for the American people's ability to orgy ::)
Post by: Frumple on November 11, 2013, 10:10:24 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 11, 2013, 10:15:13 pm
The jumping question? Don't some people get an urge to jump from high places even if they're, y'know, not depressed at all? From what I understand it's just an urge some people get; intrusive thought, but otherwise meaningless.Frenchies coined it as the call to the void, distinguishing it from other intrusive thoughts as apparently it's worthy of such.
Post by: misko27 on November 11, 2013, 10:27:26 pm
2.23, Liberal Airhead.Not really, it's possible to hold viewpoints that are similar to other while disagreeing with the idea behind it and the overall philosophy it follows.
Apparently I'm a fascist if I think some people are genetically predisposed to depression, and I have a healthy respect for the American people's ability to orgy ::)
If you put straight "somewhat disagree" on everything, you end up with exactly 3, or still within "True American" range. You are below that, and trending close to the most liberal category.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 11, 2013, 10:31:49 pm
2.23, Liberal Airhead.So, approximately how many times per day do you feel the urge to wipe this sinful Earth clean of everybody who is different from you?
Apparently I'm a fascist if I think some people are genetically predisposed to depression, and I have a healthy respect for the American people's ability to orgy ::)
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on November 11, 2013, 10:37:38 pm
Better salute the flag more vigorously in the future before I fall to the fascist hordes.
2.23, Liberal Airhead.
Apparently I'm a fascist if I think some people are genetically predisposed to depression, and I have a healthy respect for the American people's ability to orgy ::)
Eh, whatcha gonna do? The 50's were a silly, questionable place where anything 'bad' was fascism. :v
Post by: Putnam on November 11, 2013, 11:58:49 pm
Reading the thing suggests that the higher the score is, the more receptive...
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 12, 2013, 12:01:39 am
/me hides in a bunker and starts listening to a gramophone record while a portrait of a mustached man hangs from the ceiling for no good reason
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on November 12, 2013, 12:13:16 am
4.2.Wait. You need reasons (good ones, for that matter) to have portraits of mustached men hanging from the ceiling?
/me hides in a bunker and starts listening to a gramophone record while a portrait of a mustached man hangs from the ceiling for no good reason
Post by: Angle on November 12, 2013, 12:18:08 am
Post by: LegendaryWoodBurner on November 12, 2013, 12:20:16 am
Post by: FearfulJesuit on November 12, 2013, 12:21:26 am
Post by: Bauglir on November 12, 2013, 12:26:22 am
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 12, 2013, 12:31:05 am
4.2.Wait. You need reasons (good ones, for that matter) to have portraits of mustached men hanging from the ceiling?
/me hides in a bunker and starts listening to a gramophone record while a portrait of a mustached man hangs from the ceiling for no good reason
i can't see them at all from this angle and some of them are strapped to the ceiling fan so they blur a lot
Post by: Xantalos on November 12, 2013, 12:58:41 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 12, 2013, 01:05:11 am
Post by: Hanslanda on November 12, 2013, 01:11:41 am
2.0, liberal airhead.
2.53
My liberal is superior, Xantalos. Resistance is futile.
Post by: Sappho on November 12, 2013, 02:25:14 am
Also, what the hell is the deal with this question?
[19] Some people are born with an urge to jump from high places.
Post by: kaijyuu on November 12, 2013, 02:28:14 am
Post by: MaximumZero on November 12, 2013, 02:29:25 am
Post by: alexandertnt on November 12, 2013, 02:36:38 am
*runs away to hide from all the fascists*
Post by: Jelle on November 12, 2013, 02:52:29 am
You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.
Except not really. ???
[22] Wars and social troubles may someday be ended by an earthquake or flood that will destroy the whole world.
What does this one have to do with facism? I answered agree strongly, but I have no idea where that puts me.
Post by: Xantalos on November 12, 2013, 02:56:20 am
Post by: misko27 on November 12, 2013, 02:58:30 am
Your F score is: 3.3666...Thing on the bottom says question twenty-two measures Superstition (The belief in mystical determinants of the individual's fate).
You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.
Except not really. ???
[22] Wars and social troubles may someday be ended by an earthquake or flood that will destroy the whole world.
What does this one have to do with facism? I answered agree strongly, but I have no idea where that puts me.
Post by: scriver on November 12, 2013, 04:38:57 am
[22] Wars and social troubles may someday be ended by an earthquake or flood that will destroy the whole world.
What does this one have to do with facism? I answered agree strongly, but I have no idea where that puts me.
Biblical Flood reference?
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross."
Post by: Xantalos on November 12, 2013, 04:44:18 am
It's either the Pope who got transmogrified into a supermodel or I'm missing something.
Post by: Oliolli on November 12, 2013, 05:09:04 am
Liberal airhead. Just another brick in the wall around here.
Post by: Darvi on November 12, 2013, 05:20:06 am
's cool, I guess.
Post by: Helgoland on November 12, 2013, 08:39:35 am
Liberal airhead. Some of those questions (like the one about homosexuality) are definitely pretty dated, though. I'm not a fascist, but I'm certainly a left-wing, social-capitalist, anti-democrat.2.2. My stance is pretty similar, I usually call myself a "totalitarian liberal" :D
Post by: scrdest on November 12, 2013, 11:56:38 am
Post by: Graknorke on November 12, 2013, 04:42:41 pm
Whining rotter
Those questions were stupid. Mostly, they don't actually lead to the result. Many of those have nothing to do with political ideals.
Post by: Bdthemag on November 12, 2013, 04:48:05 pm
1.967Says the whining rotter.
Whining rotter
Those questions were stupid. Mostly, they don't actually lead to the result. Many of those have nothing to do with political ideals.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 12, 2013, 04:50:04 pm
Many of those have nothing to do with political ideals.I don't think it necessarily is about your political ideals. It's about your likelihood to be swept up in fascist rhetoric.
Bay 12 is interesting. I figured we'd all be whining rotters when this started, but not so. Our average is clearly a step less authoritarian than the 1950's American average, but our "pro-authoritarians" reside there. And then there are the group that I'm in, who would probably get themselves killed futilely resisting the end of free society because the rest of you bastards were too afraid to stand up. Well, I hope you're happy, hypothetical future Bay 12.
Post by: Bdthemag on November 12, 2013, 04:53:09 pm
Post by: Owlbread on November 12, 2013, 05:09:26 pm
Post by: FuzzyZergling on November 12, 2013, 08:37:05 pm
'MERICA!
(I'm actually Canadian though...)
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 13, 2013, 12:13:53 am
You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.
WOO! Almost dead-center.
Post by: MaximumZero on November 13, 2013, 02:00:19 am
Don't worry. I'll whip the liberal airheads into a liberal hurricane of justice and 'MURRICA.Many of those have nothing to do with political ideals.I don't think it necessarily is about your political ideals. It's about your likelihood to be swept up in fascist rhetoric.
Bay 12 is interesting. I figured we'd all be whining rotters when this started, but not so. Our average is clearly a step less authoritarian than the 1950's American average, but our "pro-authoritarians" reside there. And then there are the group that I'm in, who would probably get themselves killed futilely resisting the end of free society because the rest of you bastards were too afraid to stand up. Well, I hope you're happy, hypothetical future Bay 12.
Post by: Guardian G.I. on November 13, 2013, 02:17:41 am
Quote
Your F Score is: 3.566666666666667
You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.
Hmm...
Post by: Aptus on November 13, 2013, 02:53:35 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 20, 2013, 01:20:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
(http://i.imgur.com/iZIl6yD.png)
As you can see, this can have rather unbalanced results.
Post by: Haspen on November 20, 2013, 01:43:04 pm
41% Compliance and Steadiness, 11% Dominance, 7% Influence.
/me is a push-over ._.
Post by: Dutchling on November 20, 2013, 01:51:17 pm
0% Dominance o.o
Post by: Haspen on November 20, 2013, 01:52:16 pm
/me shoves Dutchling, whatcha gonna do? >:3
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 20, 2013, 01:55:52 pm
i also closed the tab and i'm too lazy to do it again
if laziness was a stat i'd score fairly high i guess
Post by: freeformschooler on November 20, 2013, 01:58:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Because compliance is for wusses.
You would think low compliance equals high dominance, but apparently, they are not polar opposites.
Post by: Darvi on November 20, 2013, 02:05:01 pm
Holy fuck FFS you're positively ancient.
Post by: Graknorke on November 20, 2013, 02:17:26 pm
/me Joins Haspen in shoving people around
Post by: Tarran on November 20, 2013, 02:25:11 pm
My Steadiness is second at 30%.
My Influence and Dominance are at 11%.
Well, at least I'm not the kind of guy who bends to every single request. But it's nearing there.
Can't do that test. Too many groups where none of the options apply to me.The idea is to pick the one which is least or most true for you out of 4, whether or not they're noticeably true or not does not matter.
Post by: Darvi on November 20, 2013, 02:28:24 pm
Post by: Frumple on November 20, 2013, 02:40:14 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on November 20, 2013, 02:46:18 pm
... yeah, steadiness at 47%, then compliance at 30 and... dominance and influence both ~half the one before (15, 7). Was kinda' odd, the halving coincidence. Was stretching a lot on a lot of the groups, though, in terms of applicability.
We're, like, one standard deviation away from being the same person! Maybe less!
Post by: Tarran on November 20, 2013, 02:50:42 pm
But they're all equally true i.e. 0%If they're all equally true, then you could just pick them based on which one you want to be true of you rather than what is actually true. I mean, it's not like you'll suffer some magical divine ban hammer or something if you aren't completely correct. You can afford a moderate amount of errors. It's pretty much what I did on a couple of questions.
Post by: Lagslayer on November 20, 2013, 03:03:15 pm
Not sure how to feel about this.
Post by: scrdest on November 20, 2013, 03:12:50 pm
Post by: misko27 on November 20, 2013, 04:03:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
My stats (Oh no it's my age it's not like it's already on my profile and given out to anyone who asks):
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
You act in an assertive, diplomatic way and strive for a stable, ordered life.As you can see I scored fairly close for compliance, dominance, and steadiness.
You are goal orientated but tend to avoid risk taking.
You handle pressure well - you push yourself and expect others to do the same.
/me
Post by: Putnam on November 20, 2013, 04:26:38 pm
All the info is in the URL, btw. Check it:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 20, 2013, 04:34:39 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
You are a clear thinker. You have an inner need to be objective and analytical. You like to pursue a definite course of action. You respond to logic rather than emotion.
You are likely to be particularly good at handling challenging technical assignments.
You have a strong inner motivation to attain personal goals. You like to become 'the expert' in your chosen field.
I'm not the strongest influence on things, as it turns out. Aside from all that, I hole well on the remaining 3.
Spoiler: Details (click to show/hide)
Post by: i2amroy on November 20, 2013, 04:46:18 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also Fun with Graphs!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Karlito on November 20, 2013, 05:13:22 pm
(http://www.123test.com/disc-personality-test/diagram/activiteiten/2:1993/71:64:61:14/Steadiness:Dominance:Compliance:Influence/)
Post by: Shakerag on November 20, 2013, 05:53:52 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Huh.
Post by: Culise on November 20, 2013, 06:36:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: FuzzyZergling on November 20, 2013, 07:13:43 pm
0% Dominance club :3
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 20, 2013, 07:27:22 pm
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on November 20, 2013, 08:00:07 pm
Dominance
They are usually direct and positive with people, enjoying being the centre of attraction and may take it for granted that people will think highly of them.
They may have a tendency to be rather critical of others. Consequently, other people may tend to see them as being rather domineering and overpowering.
Compliance
are usually peaceful and adaptable.
tend not to be aggressive.
tend to be cautious rather than impulsive.
avoid risk-taking.
act in a tactful, diplomatic way and strive for a stable, ordered life.
are comfortable following procedures in both their personal and business life.
This is somewhat accurate except for the little thing about domineering and overpowering, I'm more fluffy and going with the flow.
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 20, 2013, 08:42:12 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on November 20, 2013, 08:43:50 pm
Is it me, or is Influence a dump-stat for us? I've seen it bottom-level rather consistently.
We're not politicians. Thankfully.
Post by: Remuthra on November 20, 2013, 09:01:50 pm
(http://www.123test.com/disc-personality-test/diagram/activiteiten/2:1997/93:54:32:11/Dominance:Steadiness:Influence:Compliance/)
Post by: Putnam on November 20, 2013, 09:12:35 pm
Is it me, or is Influence a dump-stat for us? I've seen it bottom-level (Okay, bottom-2) rather consistently.
Is it me, or is Influence a dump-stat for us? I've seen it bottom-level rather consistently.
We're not politicians. Thankfully.
:I
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 20, 2013, 09:28:55 pm
It's quite probably a dump category for introverted folks, which I know from previous quizzes constitutes most of the quiz-taking population of Bay12.Indeed. Bay 12 is particularly a magnet for INTJs, who make up a little over 1% of the general population, but make up 30% of Bay 12. Introverts in general make up 50% of the general population, and 82.4% of Bay 12. We also had zero ESTJs, ESTPs, and ESFPs in the original Shit let's be Myers-Briggs poll. Apparently Dwarf Fortress and Extroverted Sensors don't get along.
Post by: Remuthra on November 20, 2013, 09:30:38 pm
Introverts are better climbers, so they have a much easier time crawling their way up the Difficulty Precipice.It's quite probably a dump category for introverted folks, which I know from previous quizzes constitutes most of the quiz-taking population of Bay12.Indeed. Bay 12 is particularly a magnet for INTJs, who make up a little over 1% of the general population, but make up 30% of Bay 12. Introverts in general make up 50% of the general population, and 82.4% of Bay 12. We also had zero ESTJs, ESTPs, and ESFPs in the original Shit let's be Myers-Briggs poll. Apparently Dwarf Fortress and Extroverted Sensors don't get along.
Post by: SalmonGod on November 20, 2013, 10:19:41 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I don't know about this one. It's one of those personality tests where each metric has components which could describe me correctly, especially in the right context. The whole thing feels... mushy.
It doesn't help that I have my own, very passive form of dominance/influence. People tend to see me as a push-over when they first meet me, but will give up on that opinion after a few years. I don't engage in pointless conflict and am very soft-spoken, but also very good at recognizing when people are in a receptive state and very good at presenting my own point of view. I will often concede a disagreement for the moment, for the sake of avoiding damage to potential future receptiveness, and bring it up again when the time is right. I'm very patient and persistent. My wife is seen as an incredibly aggressive, domineering personality, but she has changed much, much more than I have in the course of our relationship. If there is any point of susceptibility to reason, then I'm the person who will eventually find it. I think this is one of my biggest points of contention with authority figures, too, because my style of relating to people doesn't really work in a relationship balanced on binary switch between obedience and conflict.
Anyway, I have no idea how that's supposed to fit into this thing's form of measurement.
Post by: Tiruin on November 20, 2013, 10:29:27 pm
Errm.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Because compliance is for wusses.
You would think low compliance equals high dominance, but apparently, they are not polar opposites.
So I have latent wussiness? O_o
Also I did the test twice with gender difference (ie picked Male, then Female) to wonder on why this even matters.
Spoiler: My 'Male' Result (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Female Result (click to show/hide)
MINOR DEVIATION! MINOR DEVIATION! D:<
No deviation based on gender at all. Woo!
...Also I believe this test was placed in a Western culture standpoint? I was unsure (picked college) despite me being in a university..given that I'm studying in a university...
Um.
Post by: Vector on November 20, 2013, 10:46:24 pm
Well then >_>
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 20, 2013, 10:47:59 pm
Well then >_>See! I knew you had an aggressively assertive maniac inside you somewhere.
Post by: Tiruin on November 20, 2013, 10:52:20 pm
wat
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 20, 2013, 10:54:55 pm
Post by: freeformschooler on November 20, 2013, 10:56:30 pm
It's quite probably a dump category for introverted folks, which I know from previous quizzes constitutes most of the quiz-taking population of Bay12.Indeed. Bay 12 is particularly a magnet for INTJs, who make up a little over 1% of the general population, but make up 30% of Bay 12. Introverts in general make up 50% of the general population, and 82.4% of Bay 12. We also had zero ESTJs, ESTPs, and ESFPs in the original Shit let's be Myers-Briggs poll. Apparently Dwarf Fortress and Extroverted Sensors don't get along.
Extroverted Sensor: "Fuck, what is this? A Matrix inside the Matrix? C'mon Jerry, let's go throw some hoops."
...You can fill it in and get results without stating age and gender?
wat
It does say they're optional.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on November 20, 2013, 11:30:40 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
>>handle pressure well
lololololololol
Spoiler: This is much more accurate. (click to show/hide)
I do "push myself" and "expect others to do the same", if by "expect others" you mean "question why others are not as hard on themselves as I am on myself" then yes. I'm surprised dominance isn't higher for me, considering it seems to be the main trait of "self-sufficient goal orientated people who want to be recognized for their efforts."
...That does sound like Vector, actually, from what I know about some person on the internet who I never met in meat space and commune with purely through digital text media that can't even display sarcasm accurately.
Post by: Solifuge on November 21, 2013, 12:08:25 am
Spoiler: I am surprised Compliance wasn't much lower! (click to show/hide)
There were several questions where all of them were strong traits, or none were, and nothing stood out. Also, High Steadiness was expected... but I would have thought a bit less dominance, and a bit more influence. Shoe fits, though!
Post by: Putnam on November 21, 2013, 01:00:50 am
It's quite probably a dump category for introverted folks, which I know from previous quizzes constitutes most of the quiz-taking population of Bay12.Indeed. Bay 12 is particularly a magnet for INTJs, who make up a little over 1% of the general population, but make up 30% of Bay 12. Introverts in general make up 50% of the general population, and 82.4% of Bay 12. We also had zero ESTJs, ESTPs, and ESFPs in the original Shit let's be Myers-Briggs poll. Apparently Dwarf Fortress and Extroverted Sensors don't get along.
That would explain that a bit (I'm the only major influence? Really???). I took the Myers-Briggs finally and got ENFJ, Extravert(33%) iNtuitive(50%) Feeling(12%) Judging(1%)
Post by: Tiruin on November 21, 2013, 01:29:43 am
It's unsecure enough that you can relabel all the fields through the URL, and you think it requires you to state sex and age?
*sigh*...You can fill it in and get results without stating age and gender?
wat
It does say they're optional.
Cheers to fallibility.
Post by: freeformschooler on November 21, 2013, 01:41:07 am
Post by: mastahcheese on November 21, 2013, 02:07:56 am
Screw you dominance!
1:You are conscientious, diligent and pay attention to detail. You constantly strive for accuracy and high standards.
2: You have an inner drive to be systematic and precise in all that you do.
3: You are a natural choice for work that requires attention to detail and accuracy.
1: My attention to detail is rubbish. I'm apathetic when it comes to standards.
2: One look at my work and all the stuff that I just say "meh, good enough" and you'd see this is incorrect.
3: I have a natural choice for work that doesn't require the expenditure of energy.
Pretty accurate test, I'd say.
Post by: Tiruin on November 21, 2013, 02:10:21 am
Also, while we're on the topic of pseudoscience personality test silliness, this article is excellent. (http://gawker.com/15-unmistakable-outrageously-secret-signs-youre-an-ex-1182875137)...That's a silly article with silly reasons. I feel discriminated as an introvert. :I
Post by: Solifuge on November 21, 2013, 02:18:15 am
Also, while we're on the topic of pseudoscience personality test silliness, this article is excellent. (http://gawker.com/15-unmistakable-outrageously-secret-signs-youre-an-ex-1182875137)
Err... I would have actually liked to read an article about Extroverts. Instead, I got a poorly-concealed rant about how needy, dysfunctional, self-absorbed, and generally terrible Introverts are. :\
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 21, 2013, 02:27:35 am
Also, while we're on the topic of pseudoscience personality test silliness, this article is excellent. (http://gawker.com/15-unmistakable-outrageously-secret-signs-youre-an-ex-1182875137)
Err... I would have actually liked to read an article about Extroverts. Instead, I got a poorly-concealed rant about how needy, dysfunctional, self-absorbed, and generally terrible Introverts are. :\
i want to find the person who wrote that and rip out their voicebox with a rusty spoon
i will speak at whichever volume i want you little shit
Post by: Vector on November 21, 2013, 02:28:46 am
Post by: mastahcheese on November 21, 2013, 02:29:42 am
We're about to form a mob.
Of introverts.
Since when do introverts mob?
Post by: Tiruin on November 21, 2013, 02:42:39 am
Since when do introverts mob?When nobody expects it.
Also we're human. People. Not just a set of 'definitive characteristics' which you may allude to our superficial form.
..THough I'll just discard that article as a...very poorly-worded joke-article given how obvious the differences are. And the wording. And the...
Post by: Dutchling on November 21, 2013, 02:51:58 am
Post by: Oliolli on November 21, 2013, 05:21:58 am
(http://www.123test.com/disc-personality-test/diagram/activiteiten/2:1995/89:86:36:7/Steadiness:Compliance:Dominance:Influence/)
Post by: alexandertnt on November 21, 2013, 05:44:45 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Time to join the zero dominance club and wait around for people to tell me what to do :P
Some of these personality tests make me sound increadibly boring...
Post by: freeformschooler on November 21, 2013, 09:57:40 am
Also, while we're on the topic of pseudoscience personality test silliness, this article is excellent. (http://gawker.com/15-unmistakable-outrageously-secret-signs-youre-an-ex-1182875137)
Err... I would have actually liked to read an article about Extroverts. Instead, I got a poorly-concealed rant about how needy, dysfunctional, self-absorbed, and generally terrible Introverts are. :\
The article wasn't even about extroverts and introverts. Anyone with half a brain can see most of that list is blatant facetiousness. I could write the same thing from the other side of the coin, and it would sound exactly as stupid, false, and elitist. Rather than a poorly concealed rant, I posted it as a well-concealed reminder that we, far too often, come up with arbitrary and ridiculous ways to separate and feel superior to each other. Introverts vs extroverts is just the latest dumb way of doing that, and it goes both ways.
And yet, the comments there on it go on to embody the elitist behavior it's describing :I
Post by: Cecilff2 on November 21, 2013, 05:18:33 pm
Time to join the zero dominance club and wait around for people to tell me what to do :P
(http://www.123test.com/disc-personality-test/diagram/activiteiten/2:1987/82:57:32:21/Dominance:Steadiness:Influence:Compliance/)
Gimme ur money.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: WealthyRadish on November 21, 2013, 10:42:42 pm
Spoiler: Tremble before my passivity! (click to show/hide)
It's annoying that they don't keep the colors for the different traits consistent. What's the point of a colorful graph if the colors change between tests?
Post by: SalmonGod on November 21, 2013, 11:05:43 pm
Also, while we're on the topic of pseudoscience personality test silliness, this article is excellent. (http://gawker.com/15-unmistakable-outrageously-secret-signs-youre-an-ex-1182875137)
Err... I would have actually liked to read an article about Extroverts. Instead, I got a poorly-concealed rant about how needy, dysfunctional, self-absorbed, and generally terrible Introverts are. :\
The article wasn't even about extroverts and introverts. Anyone with half a brain can see most of that list is blatant facetiousness. I could write the same thing from the other side of the coin, and it would sound exactly as stupid, false, and elitist. Rather than a poorly concealed rant, I posted it as a well-concealed reminder that we, far too often, come up with arbitrary and ridiculous ways to separate and feel superior to each other. Introverts vs extroverts is just the latest dumb way of doing that, and it goes both ways.
And yet, the comments there on it go on to embody the elitist behavior it's describing :I
So are you saying that you don't believe that the introversion/extroversion spectrum is a real thing that can accurately describe people, or that you just don't like the way people are using those labels as slanders or badges of honor?
There is a lot of really shitty elitism going on with the whole introvert vs extrovert thing on the internet. I've seen quite a few articles written about introversion by introverts that made me want to claw the author's eyes out for behaving much as that article described, and giving introversion or any recognition of the subject at all a bad rep.
But the differences are real, and not recognized or respected by our culture nearly as much as they should be.
Post by: misko27 on November 21, 2013, 11:34:29 pm
Quote
You want to know who wasn't an introvert? Jesus.That is word-for-word the exact logic I use when making ridiculous claims in real life, Hitler substituted where applicable. No, I think I'm superior because of my intelligence and experience, my introversion is either a beneficial, neutral or harmful trait depending on the circumstance.
Anyway, Introversion is just, another prism. These are all just prisms through which to view ourselves. In reality most people are of course not going to fit into a specific thing, because there is always a person who simply doesn't apply to a label; there will be a person out there who defines say, extrovert, but most don't. There are a lot of different people, and they are complex beings. But at the same time we don't want to just throw up our hands and say that we can never know. What we can do is hold a quiz between us and the wall and see what shape it makes, and pick up a different quiz and see what that does, and maybe after a while pattern will develop of certain shapes, certain colors, and just maybe we'll learn about ourselves.
Post by: freeformschooler on November 21, 2013, 11:39:31 pm
So are you saying that you don't believe that the introversion/extroversion spectrum is a real thing that can accurately describe people, or that you just don't like the way people are using those labels as slanders or badges of honor?
No, the difference has been tested to some extent. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3129862/) It's extrapolation that's the problem. I see people talking about introvert vs extrovert ALL THE TIME on Facebook and every tenth blog article. Since the last article linked was a bit cruel and way too facetious, here's the problem with it put more eloquently and less sarcastically:
http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2013/08/29/the-introvert-fetish/
It's totally understandable anyone could be jaded by a large society constantly pushing for "outgoing" and "charismatic" traits, and how anyone could be jaded by a flurry of meme images mocking them for having plenty of friends, but reversed stupidity is not intelligence.
It's annoying that they don't keep the colors for the different traits consistent. What's the point of a colorful graph if the colors change between tests?
Until seeing mastahcheese's, I was tempted to think they just reused the same image for each result and changed the text :P
QuoteYou want to know who wasn't an introvert? Jesus.That is word-for-word the exact logic I use when making ridiculous claims in real life, Hitler substituted where applicable. No, I think I'm superior because of my intelligence and experience, my introversion is either a beneficial, neutral or harmful trait depending on the circumstance.
Anyway, Introversion is just, another prism. These are all just prisms through which to view ourselves. In reality most people are of course not going to fit into a specific thing, because there is always a person who simply doesn't apply to a label; there will be a person out there who defines say, extrovert, but most don't. There are a lot of different people, and they are complex beings. But at the same time we don't want to just throw up our hands and say that we can never know. What we can do is hold a quiz between us and the wall and see what shape it makes, and pick up a different quiz and see what that does, and maybe after a while pattern will develop of certain shapes, certain colors, and just maybe we'll learn about ourselves.
Thank you for being a reasonable person.
Post by: mastahcheese on November 21, 2013, 11:52:31 pm
Apparently I'm so one-dimensional that the chart had too many figures it could use.It's annoying that they don't keep the colors for the different traits consistent. What's the point of a colorful graph if the colors change between tests?Until seeing mastahcheese's, I was tempted to think they just reused the same image for each result and changed the text :P
Post by: SalmonGod on November 22, 2013, 12:44:32 am
So are you saying that you don't believe that the introversion/extroversion spectrum is a real thing that can accurately describe people, or that you just don't like the way people are using those labels as slanders or badges of honor?
No, the difference has been tested to some extent. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3129862/) It's extrapolation that's the problem. I see people talking about introvert vs extrovert ALL THE TIME on Facebook and every tenth blog article. Since the last article linked was a bit cruel and way too facetious, here's the problem with it put more eloquently and less sarcastically:
http://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2013/08/29/the-introvert-fetish/
It's totally understandable anyone could be jaded by a large society constantly pushing for "outgoing" and "charismatic" traits, and how anyone could be jaded by a flurry of meme images mocking them for having plenty of friends, but reversed stupidity is not intelligence.
Yeah, I mostly agree with everything in the introvert fetish article. Never dug as deeply into the root origin and meaning of the fetish, but I've definitely recognized it and been very annoyed by it, as I described before. It's all just a bunch of immaturity, though, and it comes from all sides, like you said.
Definitely doesn't mean that the subject isn't worthy of awareness, though.
Introversion vs extroversion is really not meant to represent anything more than stimulation threshold. The more introverted you are, the lower your threshold, and the easier it is for you to be over-stimulated. That's really all it is. This is an easily observable thing that people tend to be fairly consistent about, and can only fail to describe a person as much as one can fail to be described as short or tall. I think the same can be said for the other three spectrums on Myers-Briggs as well.
They're absolutely not meant to paint a complete picture of a person. Just like not all short people are the same, not all introverts are deep and intelligent. The people who try to frame it as such do not know what the hell they're talking about.
But there are clear differences in the way someone's stimulation threshold can effect how one experiences life and interacts with society, just as there are in the way a really short person experiences the world vs a really tall person. Being formally aware of that subject is important for making society more inclusive. For example, public schools might realize that they're mainly designed around the needs of extroverted children, and sort of force introverts to just tough it out. But that's never going to happen unless the whole thing gets taken seriously as a little bit more than pseudoscience. You don't need hard science to recognize that a certain terminology can be useful for describing human features, and that simply having the proper language in place can go a long way towards building useful understanding.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 22, 2013, 01:44:53 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cheeetar on November 22, 2013, 01:49:44 am
Post by: Hanslanda on November 22, 2013, 01:53:57 am
That actually seems about right. I'm not terribly anxious socially. Some situations give me problems, but overall I'm well adjusted.
Post by: Putnam on November 22, 2013, 01:56:16 am
I haven't partied much and calling people bothers me in general, but other than that not much anything there.
Post by: Hanslanda on November 22, 2013, 01:57:51 am
Post by: WealthyRadish on November 22, 2013, 02:08:23 am
Post by: Putnam on November 22, 2013, 02:12:33 am
Post by: misko27 on November 22, 2013, 02:28:50 am
So Psychologists were wrong. I think the test would've been more accurate if there had been a fourth option (Crippling, with a point value of 4), which would have allowed more intense preferences, and probably pushed me over the limit.
Post by: Steelmagic on November 22, 2013, 02:33:07 am
Post by: penguinofhonor on November 22, 2013, 02:40:10 am
Weirdly enough, I really don't care about interacting with salespeople in normal situations (such as returning an item, I go downhill if it's something awkward like me spilling something). I know salespeople are a big thing for most of the people I know with any level of social anxiety.
Post by: FuzzyZergling on November 22, 2013, 02:48:09 am
40 fear + 44 avoidance.
Seems about right, I have trouble speaking in public and feel uncomfortable if there's another person in the room.
Post by: Luke_Prowler on November 22, 2013, 03:18:33 am
Is it weird for someone to be an admitted nerd/geek yet very outgoing? I never refuse a chance to go out and party, or talk to random people. The only thing that gets me is public speaking, and even then I wouldn't actually avoid doing it if I have to.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on November 22, 2013, 03:51:47 am
Post by: Frumple on November 22, 2013, 03:59:58 am
Another one of those ones that are just asking the wrong questions for the wrong reasons, really. That and the fact that most of my physical anxiety reactions are accompanied by a remarkable lack of emotional ones, which is rather incredibly annoying at times. It can be incredibly jarring to have a fairly extreme disconnect between physical reaction and emotional state, some days.
Post by: Steelmagic on November 22, 2013, 04:00:59 am
Weirdly enough, I really don't care about interacting with salespeople in normal situations (such as returning an item, I go downhill if it's something awkward like me spilling something). I know salespeople are a big thing for most of the people I know with any level of social anxiety.I'm like this too. A few years ago i would have been terrible at it and had difficulties even buying food at a McDonald's, but after a long bus trip i got used to dealing with people and now i don't understand why people get so stressed when someone tries to sell them something. It's not difficult to tell someone you're not interested in something to me.
So Psychologists were wrong. I think the test would've been more accurate if there had been a fourth option (Crippling, with a point value of 4), which would have allowed more intense preferences, and probably pushed me over the limit.I would've been just barely pushed over into social anxiety territory as well, since i REALLY don't like the idea of speaking in front of an audience.
Post by: Jelle on November 22, 2013, 04:19:34 am
You have marked social anxiety.
Huh, I thought it'd be higher. Then again I'm not really nervous or fearful of social interaction, rather just 'egh fuck dat shit'.
Post by: WealthyRadish on November 22, 2013, 04:21:23 am
Post by: Iceblaster on November 22, 2013, 04:24:35 am
Spoiler: Yaaay (click to show/hide)
I failed a spot check once again :P
Post by: Sappho on November 22, 2013, 04:36:59 am
Post by: Oliolli on November 22, 2013, 04:40:58 am
I can live with that.
Post by: Tarran on November 22, 2013, 04:42:47 am
Hmm, I personally think I should have a higher score. I guess it's due to the questions not really being those that I really try to avoid (I.e, talking to someone who I know but forgot their name). In addition, I think it might be due to the silly system of having everything add equally to the system, despite them not being similar at all. Fear of speaking in front of an audience is quite different from fear of eating in public or answering your phone in public.
Post by: Iceblaster on November 22, 2013, 04:44:36 am
...
Weeeell... I could have crippling social anxiety... Plus, who knows, maybe it's wrong due to some of these being guessed due to not having been in these situations(mostly due to age)
I'll be taking this with a grain of salt.
42 from me.
Hmm, I personally think I should have a higher score. I guess it's due to the questions not really being those that I really try to avoid (I.e, talking to someone who I know but forgot their name). In addition, I think it might be due to the silly system of having everything add equally to the system, despite them not being similar at all. Fear of speaking in front of an audience is quite different from fear of eating in public or answering your phone in public.
Agreed, too general to be accurate enough to say 'Yep, it's true. I have sever social anxiety'
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 22, 2013, 05:01:42 am
this is what working a moderately social office job for a while does to you kids
i might be being hit by a social train but i will respond normally and then rage at their antics at online forums if needed
Post by: Skyrunner on November 22, 2013, 05:21:57 am
Meh :P My worst fears are speaking up in public and calling random people.
Post by: scrdest on November 22, 2013, 05:33:45 am
Post by: Aptus on November 22, 2013, 06:45:29 am
Post by: Haspen on November 22, 2013, 06:53:50 am
I'm actually comfortable with being around the people in general (eating, passing by, doing shopping etc), but large groups around me or performing/talking to a group or being center of attention make me extremely uneasy :P
Post by: Darvi on November 22, 2013, 07:14:19 am
Might be a bit biased downwards, though. I don't so much fear as much as absolutely loathe social contact.
Substituting "dislike" for "fear" increased the score by another 20 points :V
Post by: alexandertnt on November 22, 2013, 07:20:16 am
You have very severe social anxiety.
:(
Post by: da_nang on November 22, 2013, 07:48:18 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
63. You have moderate social anxiety.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on November 22, 2013, 09:09:49 am
Things like "performing in front of an audience" or "giving a party" are things that I don't really think of as avoiding as it is me just not attempting most of them in the first place. Why would I hold a party when I'm an introverted nerd who has relatively few good friends to attend the party and prefers doing his own things by himself? Do I fear holding a party and avoid it out of fear? no, I just don't have an interest in parties in the first place. Dunno how to answer a question like that then, but if I counted it as avoidance the score would be higher.
Performing in front of people is a thing I prefer not to do, (fear:2 avoidance:1) but when I absolutely have to do it I'll suck it up. I feel kinda awkward eating public but don't fear it and can do it no problems. Telephone in public is fine, small group activities are annoying and awkward and cause some dread but if I gotta do it I gotta do it. (fear:1 avoidance:1) Public restrooms are nasty. (fear:1 avoidance:2)
Meeting strangers: >2 >3
Trying to make someone's acquaintance for the purpose of a romantic/sexual relationship:>nope>nopenuhuhnowaynope
Post by: Zangi on November 22, 2013, 09:38:36 am
I strongly avoid being social. This test seems to think avoidance based on setting/what people are already doing/what you are going to do, counts the same... So that is why it isn't higher... >.>
Maybe I should have a higher fear, but I just don't see it that way, at least for now.
Post by: Simmura McCrea on November 22, 2013, 10:00:49 am
Post by: Korbac on November 22, 2013, 10:18:30 am
Post by: RedKing on November 22, 2013, 11:43:21 am
I'm a lot better than I used to be. I dislike talking on the phone in general, partly because I don't hear very well and partly because I had a phone strapped on my head 8 hours a day for 15+ years.
Scored pretty high on the "looking a stranger in the eyes" thing, but that's just my mild Aspie-like tendencies. I can do it if I need to for an interview or something, but I'm always concerned that I'm then going to come off as some overly intense freak with goggle eyes who NEVER BLINKS.
Also scored relatively high on the "high pressure salesperson" thing, mostly because I just hate salespeople. Sales and marketing are the Devil's playthings.
Some of the other stuff is very conditional. No problem going to a party with a bunch of friends. But party with a bunch of people I barely know? Yeah, I'll be the guy standing over in the corner by himself trying to appear very interested and busy inspecting the hors d'oeuvre plate. Or clinging like a barnacle to the one person who I know slightly better than the rest.
Post by: Lagslayer on November 22, 2013, 12:01:06 pm
Post by: Hanslanda on November 22, 2013, 12:01:34 pm
Or using a public restroom, because they're usually so nasty (is that a fear of nastiness, or can we all just agree that public men's restrooms are horrible?).
Truth be told, as someone who has cleaned a lot of public restrooms, women's restrooms are always far, FAR filthier. It's uncanny. Men's rooms are rarely nice (most people that clean public restrooms give no fucks, so they end up disgusting. I give a shit, and they end up smelling nicely and not nice LOOKING, but at least discernibly clean.) but they are often better than the women's room.
Another one of those ones that are just asking the wrong questions for the wrong reasons, really. That and the fact that most of my physical anxiety reactions are accompanied by a remarkable lack of emotional ones, which is rather incredibly annoying at times. It can be incredibly jarring to have a fairly extreme disconnect between physical reaction and emotional state, some days.
Same here. I often put avoidance without fear. There are some things that just physically repulse me without any mental or emotional input: Interacting with someone for relationship/sexual reasons. I enjoy flirting and stuff, but every time I try to flirt with someone, my body is like, "YOU CAN NO LONGER SPEAK AND DESPERATELY NEED TO WALK THIS WAY OVER HERE AWAY FROM THERE." Hugely frustrating.
Post by: Kansa on November 22, 2013, 12:02:14 pm
You have moderate social anxiety.
Post by: Lagslayer on November 22, 2013, 12:11:04 pm
Truth be told, as someone who has cleaned a lot of public restrooms, women's restrooms are always far, FAR filthier. It's uncanny. Men's rooms are rarely nice (most people that clean public restrooms give no fucks, so they end up disgusting. I give a shit, and they end up smelling nicely and not nice LOOKING, but at least discernibly clean.) but they are often better than the women's room.This. A million times, this. Every single part of this statement X1,000,000.
Post by: Culise on November 22, 2013, 12:33:45 pm
To be fair, avoidance is that low because I've learned that it's difficult to get around many of these situations, so I've given up on trying. It's a rather unsurprising result, to be honest; my heart rate goes up playing multiplayer games where I can't even see my opponent, much less actually dealing with people.
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on November 22, 2013, 04:43:54 pm
Kinda struck me as a flawed test, for the previously mentioned reasons, but y'know, still semi-accurate, I'd say.
I mean, I did try to generally look at it from the social standpoint, but even then, there aren't many situations I'd avoid based on that sort of stuff.
Post by: MorleyDev on November 22, 2013, 06:04:42 pm
There are times when I avoid a situation because I lack the emotional energy to deal with that situation, but that's not what I'd call fear...or things I don't do because I either physically can't. Like peeing in public bathrooms, at least in urinals. It's not even anxiety, I just physically can't pee without a closed door and isolated space. I can use the cubicle though so not much of an issue. Shy bladder, what you gonna do?
Post by: misko27 on November 22, 2013, 06:13:08 pm
Post by: Graknorke on November 22, 2013, 07:05:19 pm
Well, I'm fine. Can we go back to shoving the people with 0% dominance scores now?
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 22, 2013, 09:37:56 pm
Marked.
On one hand, I hate making an ass out of myself; and there are more than plenty of ways to screw up just about anything as it is. And second off, I'm not a people-person; in fact, I'm the kind of person that has been jaded to people.
Spoiler: spoiler'd for convenience (click to show/hide)
Post by: Remuthra on November 22, 2013, 10:32:56 pm
I no know fear.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 22, 2013, 11:05:14 pm
Post by: Solifuge on November 22, 2013, 11:20:05 pm
- 33(fear) + 39(avoidance) = 72
- You have marked social anxiety.
I took "Fear" to mean "Experience elevated anxiety and/or being keyed-up or worked up about". I'm significantly better than I was, but I'm still surprised it's as high as it was. Might have been generous when assigning points, though.
Post by: Gunner-Chan on November 22, 2013, 11:25:46 pm
Either that or the test is kinda shit.
Post by: kaijyuu on November 23, 2013, 12:44:08 am
Either that or the test is kinda shit.I'm thinking it's shit.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 23, 2013, 12:50:26 am
Shush, you're the one who chose to participate in a thread about internet-based personality tests. Even the legitimate ones aren't legitimate.Either that or the test is kinda shit.I'm thinking it's shit.
Post by: kaijyuu on November 23, 2013, 01:05:05 am
Post by: Vector on November 23, 2013, 01:26:27 am
Post by: MaximumZero on November 23, 2013, 02:18:46 am
Post by: mastahcheese on November 23, 2013, 02:27:15 am
You have very severe social anxiety.
Forget people, man!
I live with my wife and cats and that's fine by me.
Post by: Elephant Parade on November 23, 2013, 02:34:07 am
Pretty much what I was expecting.
Post by: Descan on November 23, 2013, 04:53:03 am
52(fear) + 57(avoidance) = 109Is your wife a cat?
You have very severe social anxiety.
Forget people, man!
I live with my wife and cats and that's fine by me.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 23, 2013, 04:54:08 am
52(fear) + 57(avoidance) = 109Is your wife a cat?
You have very severe social anxiety.
Forget people, man!
I live with my wife and cats and that's fine by me.
is your wife a genetically engineered catgirl for domestic ownership
Post by: Tiruin on November 23, 2013, 06:04:43 am
Post by: sjm9876 on November 23, 2013, 07:06:23 am
Although I have to say, it's very specific things that ramped the score up, namely things involving large groups or public speaking. The rest mostly scored 0-0 of a 0-1/1-0.
Post by: Graknorke on November 23, 2013, 07:59:42 am
is your wife a genetically engineered catgirl for domestic ownershipLSP, that was so long ago. Why and how do you still remember it?
Post by: Dutchling on November 23, 2013, 09:14:00 am
Meh. Most of these are situations, while I really just don't like people.
Post by: miauw62 on November 23, 2013, 10:55:43 am
Post by: scrdest on November 23, 2013, 12:40:34 pm
35(fear) + 44(avoidance) = 79
Marked.
On one hand, I hate making an ass out of myself; and there are more than plenty of ways to screw up just about anything as it is. And second off, I'm not a people-person; in fact, I'm the kind of person that has been jaded to people.Spoiler: spoiler'd for convenience (click to show/hide)
Heh. That sounds... familiar.
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 23, 2013, 01:00:54 pm
I guess a better summary should have been: If I want to be alone for the rest of my life, it'll be on my own terms, not society's.35(fear) + 44(avoidance) = 79Heh. That sounds... familiar.
Marked.
On one hand, I hate making an ass out of myself; and there are more than plenty of ways to screw up just about anything as it is. And second off, I'm not a people-person; in fact, I'm the kind of person that has been jaded to people.Spoiler: spoiler'd for convenience (click to show/hide)
Post by: lue on November 23, 2013, 05:54:26 pm
Not too surprising :) .
Post by: mastahcheese on November 23, 2013, 10:10:51 pm
No, and no.Is your wife a cat?is your wife a genetically engineered catgirl for domestic ownership
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on November 23, 2013, 10:27:34 pm
Post by: Owlga on November 23, 2013, 11:35:35 pm
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on November 24, 2013, 09:14:45 pm
Post by: RedWarrior0 on November 24, 2013, 11:37:52 pm
I'm sorry, that was stupid. Why would anybody think that?
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 24, 2013, 11:41:59 pm
What if... What if Owlga isn't really an anime girl?
HERESY *BLAM*
Post by: RedWarrior0 on November 24, 2013, 11:43:19 pm
I know, silly me, right? I haven't even had anything to drink today!What if... What if Owlga isn't really an anime girl?Next you'll be saying Xantalos isn't an eldritch abomination, greatorder is not a polar bear, and I could never be a stick figure wondering where it is.
I'm sorry, that was stupid. Why would anybody think that?
Post by: Owlga on November 25, 2013, 12:18:48 am
Owlga is the chillest anime girl ever.
Oh this is the best thing. I don't usually do this but fucking sigged.
Post by: Gunner-Chan on November 25, 2013, 12:33:25 am
I think I accidentally went full nerd.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 25, 2013, 12:37:52 am
Post by: Eagle_eye on November 25, 2013, 12:40:24 am
Post by: Yoink on November 25, 2013, 10:36:45 am
Also did the test in the OP: Introvert(22%) iNtuitive(38%) Thinking(1%) Perceiving(67)%
I guess I'm an "introverted extrovert", as they say- I enjoy social interaction, and require it to be happy, but I am both terrible at it and often rather frightened of it. But oh well, that's what alcohol is for! :))
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 25, 2013, 01:03:53 pm
Post by: Darvi on November 25, 2013, 01:06:44 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on November 25, 2013, 02:18:08 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on November 25, 2013, 03:57:16 pm
Does trolling people count as social interaction?If it doesn't, then I don't think I get any social interaction.
Post by: TCM on November 26, 2013, 01:24:03 am
I don't think this test is accurate in scoring overall social aniexty anyways. I love meeting and hanging out with new people. I think speaking and performing in front of a ton of people solo is awesome. My big social anxiety isn't about introducing myself to new people, rather it's gauging how well I know them. When exactly does an aquaintance become a friend? When can I start referring to them as 'dogg'? What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke? When do I start inviting people to hang out? And perhaps my biggest situational fear, say you briefly meet someone one day and see them walking down a crowded hall the next. Is it right to make an effort to stand out to them and greet them? What if they don't notice you? What if they're in a hurry? The test makes no mention of this aniexty, perhaps I have to go back and read up on it.
So yeah, I'm always stuck trying to find my 'Relationship Level' with everyone like some goddamn dating simulator.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 26, 2013, 01:25:12 am
11. Hmmph.
I don't think this test is accurate in scoring overall social aniexty anyways. I love meeting and hanging out with new people. I think speaking and performing in front of a ton of people solo is awesome. My big social anxiety isn't about introducing myself to new people, rather it's gauging how well I know them. When exactly does an aquaintance become a friend? When can I start referring to them as 'dogg'? What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke? When do I start inviting people to hang out? And perhaps my biggest situational fear, say you briefly meet someone one day and see them walking down a crowded hall the next. Is it right to make an effort to stand out to them and greet them? What if they don't notice you? What if they're in a hurry? The test makes no mention of this aniexty, perhaps I have to go back and read up on it.
So yeah, I'm always stuck trying to find my 'Relationship Level' with everyone like some goddamn dating simulator.
just play more dating simulators then
at some point you'll be able to recognize event flags and plan accordingly
Post by: Flying Dice on November 26, 2013, 01:42:23 am
11. Hmmph.
I don't think this test is accurate in scoring overall social aniexty anyways. I love meeting and hanging out with new people. I think speaking and performing in front of a ton of people solo is awesome. My big social anxiety isn't about introducing myself to new people, rather it's gauging how well I know them. When exactly does an aquaintance become a friend? When can I start referring to them as 'dogg'? What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke? When do I start inviting people to hang out? And perhaps my biggest situational fear, say you briefly meet someone one day and see them walking down a crowded hall the next. Is it right to make an effort to stand out to them and greet them? What if they don't notice you? What if they're in a hurry? The test makes no mention of this aniexty, perhaps I have to go back and read up on it.
So yeah, I'm always stuck trying to find my 'Relationship Level' with everyone like some goddamn dating simulator.
just play more dating simulators then
at some point you'll be able to recognize event flags and plan accordingly
The day I start recognizing event flags in reality is the day I
Post by: Putnam on November 26, 2013, 02:42:11 am
I figure this is a small part of why this concept of "friendzone" popped up.
Post by: Helgoland on November 26, 2013, 07:10:17 am
What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke?Third date. Second if she puts out.
Post by: TCM on November 26, 2013, 10:46:08 am
The idea of people getting their ideas of how relationships work from dating sims or the sims or something scares me because I know that that actually happens.
I figure this is a small part of why this concept of "friendzone" popped up.
What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke?Third date. Second if she puts out.
Why does a relationship have to be an intimate connection with someone who I'm romantically and physically attracted to? Come on y'all.
Post by: Helgoland on November 26, 2013, 01:05:18 pm
You actually make dick jokes on dates? Respect!What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke?Third date. Second if she puts out.
Why does a relationship have to be an intimate connection with someone who I'm romantically and physically attracted to? Come on y'all.
Post by: Putnam on November 26, 2013, 01:55:45 pm
The idea of people getting their ideas of how relationships work from dating sims or the sims or something scares me because I know that that actually happens.
I figure this is a small part of why this concept of "friendzone" popped up.What is the point I can make the occasional dick joke?Third date. Second if she puts out.
Why does a relationship have to be an intimate connection with someone who I'm romantically and physically attracted to? Come on y'all.
if you're confused I mean "concept of friendzone" meaning the idea that it exists as thought to exist by some people when in fact it doesn't exist at all in the way they think and it's just that, you know, not interested
Post by: TCM on November 26, 2013, 02:13:48 pm
You actually make dick jokes on dates? Respect!
If it's an opportune time with an appropriate girl, yeah. Why not?
if you're confused I mean "concept of friendzone" meaning the idea that it exists as thought to exist by some people when in fact it doesn't exist at all in the way they think and it's just that, you know, not interested
I was just wondering if you were implying that I believed in the friendzone concept. Which I don't, I fully agree with you. As a great man once said, "You can't get friendzoned, that's actually just you being a lil' bitch."
Post by: misko27 on November 26, 2013, 04:09:15 pm
*pauses, gets confused, realizes who is posting*. Sup my man.You actually make dick jokes on dates? Respect!
If it's an opportune time with an appropriate girl, yeah. Why not?if you're confused I mean "concept of friendzone" meaning the idea that it exists as thought to exist by some people when in fact it doesn't exist at all in the way they think and it's just that, you know, not interested
I was just wondering if you were implying that I believed in the friendzone concept. Which I don't, I fully agree with you. As a great man once said, "You can't get friendzoned, that's actually just you being a lil' bitch."
Post by: Bouchart on November 26, 2013, 05:21:45 pm
I can get along fine with people for the purposes of work/career but I don't like being around people otherwise. Not very social here.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 04, 2013, 01:25:15 pm
Progressivism 37.5
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 34.375
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
LAND OF FREE ENTERPRAHSE
AND...
FREEDOM
Also
sensible radical
Hehehehehe
Post by: LordSlowpoke on December 04, 2013, 01:31:25 pm
Socialism 50
Tenderness 43.75
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I sure hope that being a 401 year old male Somalian did not influence the scores.
...also, according to that test, LW is a conservative and I'm liberal the whole test is officially invalid
Post by: kaijyuu on December 04, 2013, 01:32:49 pm
Socialism 100
Tenderness 59.375
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Doctus on December 04, 2013, 01:33:23 pm
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 62.5
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on December 04, 2013, 01:34:34 pm
Quote
28) The greatest threats to our country have come from foreign ideas and agitators.It's hard for me to not tick "Agree Strongly" when I'm from a country that's right next to freaking Germany.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 04, 2013, 01:36:25 pm
Progressivism 95
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 50
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Skeptical towards religion? Me? You don't say.
Post by: scrdest on December 04, 2013, 01:44:26 pm
Progressivism 70
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 28.125
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Somewhat interesting.
Post by: Graknorke on December 04, 2013, 01:48:14 pm
Progressivism 100
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 43.75
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Apart from my lack of socialism. For that I am ashamed.
Post by: gigaraptor487 on December 04, 2013, 01:49:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Socialism 50
Tenderness 25
Funny thing is I consider myself Deist, I also have no idea how I got Nihilist.
Post by: sjm9876 on December 04, 2013, 01:58:38 pm
Socialism 75
Tenderness 28.125
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
'Sensible radical with several strong convictions,' sounds about right. Not sure about the rest
Post by: Aptus on December 04, 2013, 02:02:01 pm
- Progressivism 95
- Socialism 43.75
- Tenderness 43.75
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Haspen on December 04, 2013, 02:25:41 pm
Progressivism 67.5
Socialism 75
Tenderness 34.375
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
/me looks for his hammer and sickle.
Post by: Oliolli on December 04, 2013, 02:41:58 pm
Socialism 75
Tenderness 28.125
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It would appear kaijyuu is hoarding all the hammers and sickles until he has enough to give everyone one of each.
Post by: Remuthra on December 04, 2013, 03:04:07 pm
Progressivism 55
Socialism 0
Tenderness 18.75
Spoiler: Description Thingy (click to show/hide)
Seems like a pretty accurate test to me.
Post by: Haspen on December 04, 2013, 03:08:56 pm
Post by: Remuthra on December 04, 2013, 03:11:11 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 04, 2013, 03:25:00 pm
Lenin would be crying in joy if we would join his socialist state. So many atheistic socialists amongst us :PQuick, someone photoshop Crying Space Jesus into Crying Space Lenin.
Post by: Oliolli on December 04, 2013, 03:26:29 pm
Do not expect an official appointment in the Party once the Union of Soviet Socialist Bay Watcher Republics is founded!
Post by: Remuthra on December 04, 2013, 03:30:33 pm
Post by: Dutchling on December 04, 2013, 03:30:49 pm
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 53.125
I'm a "cold-hearted pragmatist" apparently.
Post by: Darvi on December 04, 2013, 03:41:04 pm
Progressivism 92.5Can... can we trade results? Please?
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 53.125
I'm a "cold-hearted pragmatist" apparently.
Post by: scrdest on December 04, 2013, 04:24:47 pm
Progressivism 92.5Can... can we trade results? Please?
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 53.125
I'm a "cold-hearted pragmatist" apparently.
Of course. My brain-swapping machine is warming up now.
Post by: Lagslayer on December 04, 2013, 04:31:26 pm
Spoiler: my results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Putnam on December 04, 2013, 04:34:56 pm
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 46.875
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: WealthyRadish on December 04, 2013, 04:42:05 pm
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 53.125
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Alas, I can't fully enjoy the violence when the glorious revolution comes, comrades.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on December 04, 2013, 05:18:52 pm
Socialism 62.5
Tenderness 56.25
I got the university professor profile. Not very surprising.
Post by: HFS on December 04, 2013, 05:33:33 pm
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 43.75
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jelle on December 04, 2013, 05:38:00 pm
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 40.625
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
cold-hearted radical
Accurate.
Post by: aenri on December 04, 2013, 05:42:15 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Liberated atheist? I feel euphoric already. And I feel that anarchism is really off the mark for me.
Post by: Owlbread on December 04, 2013, 05:49:43 pm
Socialism 75
Tenderness 56.25
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hmmm. It would seem all fine and well but I've always found the expression "progressive" annoying. There's something about it that irks me - maybe it's the way it's been used in the states as a nicer word than Socialism.
Post by: Bdthemag on December 04, 2013, 06:10:57 pm
Quote
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible realist with several strong convictions.
Okay then.
Post by: alexandertnt on December 04, 2013, 06:49:59 pm
Socialism 93.75
Tenderness 56.25
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah, Revolution!
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 04, 2013, 07:25:16 pm
Socialism 68.75
Tenderness 65.625
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I have no idea what Eugenics is. I may re-take the test later, thinking a bit more about my answers.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 04, 2013, 07:32:02 pm
I have no idea what Eugenics is. I may re-take the test later, thinking a bit more about my answers.The improvement of the human genepool with state sponsored programs. These can range from aborting foetuses that will develop genetic defects to the dystopian end of the scale, like the old aristocracies used to do by sterilizing the poor and weak or even the more recent Nazi example, which did Nazi things in order to have an actual society based on social darwinism.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 04, 2013, 07:36:45 pm
Post by: Bdthemag on December 04, 2013, 07:43:33 pm
Post by: Lectorog on December 04, 2013, 07:45:26 pm
Nazi example, which did Nazi things in order to have an actual society based on social darwinism.Fun fact: The Nazis justified their eugenics programs with previous US court rulings. It was a serious thing in the US for a long time; applied only to "criminals" but various disabilities can make it hard to stand up for yourself against your hateful neighbors.
Eugenics to me implies just removing a certain "undesired" gene from a group of people by not allowing people with said genes to reproduce, either by discouraging it or killing them outright.I believe this is the common interpretation of eugenics today.
Post by: Yannanth on December 04, 2013, 08:30:00 pm
Post by: Helgoland on December 04, 2013, 08:44:00 pm
Socialism 18.75
Tenderness 50
Spoiler: LOLNOPE (click to show/hide)
I guess the problem is that I answered American questions as an European; all in all, this creates the picture of a badly-done test.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 04, 2013, 08:45:05 pm
Quote
By the way, 'fox hunting' is not a 'blood sport'. Foxes ate all my uncle's chickens, that's why he shot them.It is if you chase a random fox with dogs and guns for an hour with no actual purpose behind it.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 04, 2013, 08:51:07 pm
Culling the population + Sport is generally the purpose.QuoteBy the way, 'fox hunting' is not a 'blood sport'. Foxes ate all my uncle's chickens, that's why he shot them.It is if you chase a random fox with dogs and guns for an hour with no actual purpose behind it.
Post by: misko27 on December 04, 2013, 09:04:52 pm
Funner Facts. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina_Eugenics_Board)Nazi example, which did Nazi things in order to have an actual society based on social darwinism.Fun fact: The Nazis justified their eugenics programs with previous US court rulings. It was a serious thing in the US for a long time; applied only to "criminals" but various disabilities can make it hard to stand up for yourself against your hateful neighbors.
Hmm. I was amused that changing specific answers led to specific word changes in your profile: one end of question 40 labelled me "sensible realist", while the other extreme had me as "cold-hearted realist".
Progressivism 75
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 50
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, I'm on the capitalist half of the axis: Capitalism represent! I'll be laying back with my Industrialist bros letting Benjamin do the talking. I'm mostly Realist Capitalism though.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 04, 2013, 09:11:36 pm
Funner Facts. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Carolina_Eugenics_Board)The very same board that had my great-uncle sterilized due to his Down's Syndrome.
Post by: MaximumZero on December 04, 2013, 09:49:13 pm
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 37.5
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: UltraValican on December 04, 2013, 10:25:11 pm
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 43.75
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Concerning Eugenics, I always thought the sterilization of gays was incredibly redundant and kinda funny in a sick ironic sort of way. Why would you bother sterilizing a group of people who, for the most part, won't be spreading their seed?
Its also seems pretty dumb to expect what traits we need down the line. Whose to say what will save our collective asses in the future. Unless you can promise me a race of men that can shoot crude oil out their ass and convert lead into gold via their appendix, I ain't buying it.
Post by: Lagslayer on December 04, 2013, 11:01:45 pm
Concerning Eugenics, I always thought the sterilization of gays was incredibly redundant and kinda funny in a sick ironic sort of way. Why would you bother sterilizing a group of people who, for the most part, won't be spreading their seed?Moral ramifications aside, selective breeding would still only be a temporary solution. Even the absolute smartest/strongest human has limits to their abilities. Eventually, we would have to evolve to advance further. And natural evolution is painfully slow.
Its also seems pretty dumb to expect what traits we need down the line. Whose to say what will save our collective asses in the future. Unless you can promise me a race of men that can shoot crude oil out their ass and convert lead into gold via their appendix, I ain't buying it.
Selective breeding by itself will hit it's limit very quickly.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on December 05, 2013, 12:03:33 am
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 40.625
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
...sounds about right, I guess. More liberal about social issues, more conservative about economy, neither pro-capitalist or pro-socialist, generally indifferent to politics or political sides, etc. I feel like some questions were way too simple for a complex subject to really be effective though.
Post by: Zangi on December 05, 2013, 12:09:45 pm
Progressivism 77.5
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 25
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Iceblaster on December 05, 2013, 01:02:10 pm
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 43.75
Spoiler: Hello Liberal Comrades (click to show/hide)
So yeah... This is me according to the test.
I could say it is accurate, though on religion I do think in some cases like Budhism it can help achieve peace, and while things may not be the best for all religions, that is basically how I think of it.
Feel free to yell at me :P
Post by: Culise on December 05, 2013, 01:03:46 pm
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 59.375
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Interesting, interesting. I think it's generally accurate. Liberal socially, conservative economically, religiously ambivalent (Though atheist myself, I object not to religion, but to its misuse), but optimistic.
Post by: kaijyuu on December 05, 2013, 01:09:07 pm
I trust governments and companies about equally (which is to say I do not trust them at all). I'm fine with some bits of capitalism but for the most part I want necessities to live to be guaranteed. Also I want full transparency of all positions of power (and that means all of them; governments, companies, churches, parents, you name it). Maybe not immediately of course, due to practicality reasons, but someday.
Post by: MonkeyHead on December 05, 2013, 03:26:14 pm
Socialism 81.25
Tenderness 46.875
Makes sense to me. Uncompromising ultra liberal with a secular humanist streak.
Post by: MaximumZero on December 05, 2013, 07:57:58 pm
Progressivism 87.5*bro-five*
Socialism 81.25
Tenderness 46.875
Makes sense to me. Uncompromising ultra liberal with a secular humanist streak.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 05, 2013, 08:05:23 pm
Progressivism 95
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 50
Progressivism 92.5I'd say I'm surprised, but I'm not surprised.
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 37.5
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 05, 2013, 08:06:26 pm
Lenin confirmed for time-traveling capabilities.Progressivism 95
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 50Progressivism 92.5I'd say I'm surprised, but I'm not surprised.
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 37.5
Post by: Powder Miner on December 05, 2013, 08:20:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Libertarian and strong conviction parts of it are pretty right, I'd say, though.
...My economic views are hilariously far from most of the rest of the forum, I will say, what with the 6.25 on socialism.
Post by: Remuthra on December 05, 2013, 08:22:50 pm
Post by: Powder Miner on December 05, 2013, 08:28:48 pm
Post by: misko27 on December 05, 2013, 08:30:33 pm
Post by: Remuthra on December 05, 2013, 08:33:15 pm
No, join sensible middle people! They don't have a easily repeatable, stupid slogan you can chant to drown out someone else's arguments.I can't; my zero socialism score won't allow it :P.
Down with the Leninites! Set California on fire!
Post by: Corai on December 05, 2013, 08:45:15 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So, you said something about sensible middle people?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 05, 2013, 08:48:53 pm
Post by: MorleyDev on December 05, 2013, 09:10:04 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Progressivism: 85
Socialism: 56.25
Tenderness: 37.5
Post by: Corai on December 05, 2013, 09:10:45 pm
You consider being an ultra-progressive middle ground?
Nope. I just said that because clean 50.
Post by: MaximumZero on December 05, 2013, 09:12:40 pm
Yeah, neither am I.Progressivism 95
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 50Progressivism 92.5I'd say I'm surprised, but I'm not surprised.
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 37.5
Post by: Flying Dice on December 05, 2013, 10:09:18 pm
Quote
Progressivism 92.5
Socialism 68.75
Tenderness 43.75
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible radical with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
There we go. Not perfect, but not terribly off-base.
Post by: Lagslayer on December 06, 2013, 12:32:27 am
Repent, and thou shalt be saved!
Post by: Lectorog on December 06, 2013, 12:42:14 am
You consider being an ultra-progressive middle ground?In some threads here it is.
The one flaw with this is that I am not skeptical towards religion; I am a Christian.You can be religious and skeptical toward religion. You may not be the "standard Christian".
Post by: Gunner-Chan on December 06, 2013, 12:49:21 am
Progressivism 75
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 40.625
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Surprisingly I feel like this one did things... Alright. Though a lot of the questions felt loaded or overly appealing to emotion. I also like powder miner disagree with saying I'm skeptical towards religion, since well... I'm not. I'm critical of people pushing it to others, or using it to hurt people. Not skeptical of religion itself.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on December 06, 2013, 12:56:05 am
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 65.625 (Tied with Elephant Parade for highest in this category.)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on December 06, 2013, 01:00:42 am
Highly disputable. While it is clear the test is centered with Protestants and Catholics in mind, there are numerous religions, and even sub-divisions of Christianity, which have substantially different viewpoints. There is no "Standard" Christian, and conflating a standard Christian with religious people in general has unpleasant implications; there is also no "standard" religious viewpoint, other then perhaps belief in a higher power. This was a weakness of the test.The one flaw with this is that I am not skeptical towards religion; I am a Christian.You can be religious and skeptical toward religion. You may not be the "standard Christian".
Anyway, is it just me or is Journalist the generic profession? Seems most of us here got it, within a substantial range.
Post by: scrdest on December 06, 2013, 04:01:04 am
Post by: Putnam on December 06, 2013, 04:27:59 am
The descriptions of each... thing are a mite snide (I enjoyed them, though), but the descriptions for each combination are goddamn hilarious.
I have often thought of starting a cult, hehe. (http://wikka.moreawesomethanyou.com/index.php?title=ENFJ)
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on December 06, 2013, 06:59:09 am
ENTP
Extravert(56%) iNtuitive(12%) Thinking(12%) Perceiving(44)%
You have moderate preference of Extraversion over Introversion (56%)
You have slight preference of Intuition over Sensing (12%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (12%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (44%)
Post by: Dutchling on December 06, 2013, 07:07:53 am
Post by: Darvi on December 06, 2013, 08:02:23 am
Oh my god. (http://wikka.moreawesomethanyou.com/index.php?title=Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator)Is that Trogdor with a Spork?
The descriptions of each... thing are a mite snide (I enjoyed them, though), but the descriptions for each combination are goddamn hilarious.
I have often thought of starting a cult, hehe. (http://wikka.moreawesomethanyou.com/index.php?title=ENFJ)
Post by: anzki4 on December 06, 2013, 09:33:05 am
Socialism 93.75
Tenderness 50
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I feel I got way too high socialism score, probably because of questions like: "In strikes and disputes between workers and employers I usually side with the employers" and "Capitalism works well". In disputes I don't usually side with either party, choosing sides - if any based - on individual case. And just because I don't think capitalism works well doesn't mean I think communism fares any better.
Post by: scrdest on December 06, 2013, 11:21:47 am
My results:
ENTP
Extravert(56%) iNtuitive(12%) Thinking(12%) Perceiving(44)%
You have moderate preference of Extraversion over Introversion (56%)
You have slight preference of Intuition over Sensing (12%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (12%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (44%)
Woah, my results came out as exactly 50% N/S on the other test.
Post by: kaijyuu on December 06, 2013, 12:54:28 pm
And just because I don't think capitalism works well doesn't mean I think communism fares any better.Curious: what economic system DO you favor?
Or are you of the "every system we've come up with so far is shit" opinion?
Post by: anzki4 on December 06, 2013, 03:20:23 pm
I'm more of "every system involving humans is and always will be shit" opinion.And just because I don't think capitalism works well doesn't mean I think communism fares any better.Curious: what economic system DO you favor?
Or are you of the "every system we've come up with so far is shit" opinion?
Post by: Helgoland on December 06, 2013, 03:36:55 pm
What sort of shit do you consider least shitty?I'm more of "every system involving humans is and always will be shit" opinion.And just because I don't think capitalism works well doesn't mean I think communism fares any better.Curious: what economic system DO you favor?
Or are you of the "every system we've come up with so far is shit" opinion?
Post by: Darvi on December 06, 2013, 05:03:01 pm
Post by: Sonlirain on December 06, 2013, 05:37:53 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well... guess my test got skewed because i was listening to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3SDiuFzLGo to down myself more than usual.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on December 06, 2013, 05:51:15 pm
Oh my god. (http://wikka.moreawesomethanyou.com/index.php?title=Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator)
The descriptions of each... thing are a mite snide (I enjoyed them, though), but the descriptions for each combination are goddamn hilarious.
I have often thought of starting a cult, hehe. (http://wikka.moreawesomethanyou.com/index.php?title=ENFJ)
The article on INTJ is great.
Post by: Darvi on December 06, 2013, 05:54:38 pm
Quote
Recreation
INTJs are often baffled by the strange and incomprehensible recreational rituals of other people, such as going to parties, watching television, and having sex. Instead, they prefer to spend their leisure time installing twin missile launchers in their cars to deter tailgaters and playing chess with megalomaniac CEOs of the Tyrell corporation.
Compatibility
Silly person, INTJs don't have relationships! They may, however build their own friends.
Post by: Wwolin on December 06, 2013, 06:24:51 pm
Socialism: 31.25
Tenderness: 28.125
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sonlirain on December 06, 2013, 07:26:57 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Oh god.
Post by: Pwnzerfaust on December 07, 2013, 01:55:43 am
Progressivism 90
Socialism 100
Tenderness 40.625
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
An ultra-progressive atheist socialist communist humanist. Basically the kind of person that gives upstanding Christian conservatives heart palpitations, I guess.
Post by: alexandertnt on December 07, 2013, 06:45:32 am
An ultra-progressive atheist socialist communist humanist. Basically the kind of person that gives upstanding Christian conservatives heart palpitations, I guess.
Centrists give upstanding Christian conservatives heart palpitations. You are the literal incarnation of Satan. Join the club :P
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on December 07, 2013, 07:26:48 am
Progressivism 45
Socialism 18.75
Tenderness 25
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on December 07, 2013, 10:53:33 am
Political ValuesHigh five!
Progressivism 90
Socialism 100
Tenderness 40.625Spoiler (click to show/hide)
An ultra-progressive atheist socialist communist humanist. Basically the kind of person that gives upstanding Christian conservatives heart palpitations, I guess.
Post by: kaijyuu on December 07, 2013, 01:27:30 pm
Political ValuesWoo another 100 socialism commie bastard!
Progressivism 90
Socialism 100
Tenderness 40.625Spoiler (click to show/hide)
An ultra-progressive atheist socialist communist humanist. Basically the kind of person that gives upstanding Christian conservatives heart palpitations, I guess.
Let's go take from those according to their ability and give to those according to their need.
Post by: Pwnzerfaust on December 07, 2013, 02:30:18 pm
Political ValuesWoo another 100 socialism commie bastard!
Progressivism 90
Socialism 100
Tenderness 40.625Spoiler (click to show/hide)
An ultra-progressive atheist socialist communist humanist. Basically the kind of person that gives upstanding Christian conservatives heart palpitations, I guess.
Let's go take from those according to their ability and give to those according to their need.
Mmm yeah baby, you sweet talker, you.
Post by: Graknorke on December 07, 2013, 05:10:18 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on December 07, 2013, 05:40:50 pm
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 65.625
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I felt indefferent to most-all of the items, but had some swaying beliefs on some things here and there. In essence, most of my answers was mostly wishful thinking that humanity isn't full of so many assholes (especially those who abuse certain rights to the point they should be made illegal again until said parties are humbled again, or not so careless, and etc.; basically, parenting the country. In other senses, also not wishing for conspiracy theorists to be correct (myself included)).
Post by: Pwnzerfaust on December 07, 2013, 06:17:44 pm
Can... can I tag along with my 100 progressivism?There's always room for one more. ;)
Post by: Eagle_eye on December 07, 2013, 06:33:39 pm
Socialism 100
Tenderness 50
Not sure why I'm not at 100 for progressiveness...
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 07, 2013, 06:36:58 pm
Progressivism 97.5Probably because of the racist voice in the back of your head, you monster.
Socialism 100
Tenderness 50
Not sure why I'm not at 100 for progressiveness...
Post by: Morrigi on December 08, 2013, 02:48:51 am
Socialism 25
Tenderness 46.875
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on December 08, 2013, 03:02:39 am
Socialism 93.75
Tenderness 59.375
Quote
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.I'm really not that commie, I mean sure I generally have socialist tendencies, but I think the market has some merit to it, if controlled carefully by the state.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate pragmatist with several strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Actually a little disappointed I didn't get a higher score for progressiveness. Probably because I prefer empiricism over idealism, so there were some answers I just had to put in the middle as a way of saying "It depends on the circumstances and evidence"
Post by: Eagle_eye on December 24, 2013, 12:43:01 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 24, 2013, 12:48:09 am
There's a New York Times survey that shows what regions of the US your dialect is most similar to: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/12/20/sunday-review/dialect-quiz-map.htmlYou have to use either the one that looks like this:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
ok, since the image tag doesn't seem to be working: http://imgur.com/GwujJQM
Code: [Select]
http://i.imgur.com/GwujJQMor the one with pre-included [IMG] tags, which may only exist for members.
Post by: Putnam on December 24, 2013, 12:56:13 am
Hint: add an "i." before imgur and a ".jpg", ".gif" or ".png" at the end to make it a direct link:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lectorog on December 24, 2013, 01:07:49 am
Quote
peenie wallieEDIT: I lost my imgur link, lol.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Guardian G.I. on December 24, 2013, 01:21:23 am
Socialism 93.75
Tenderness 59.375
Quote
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded conservative; this is the political profile one might associate with a protective parent. It appears that you are accepting of religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a social democrat.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate realistic centrist with few strong convictions.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 24, 2013, 01:24:26 am
Post by: BFEL on December 24, 2013, 01:25:11 am
Introvert:22%
Intuitive:75%
Thinking:1%
Perceiving:11%
found it:
Progressivism 82.5
Socialism 75
Tenderness 25
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a liberated atheist. It appears that you are distrustful towards religion, and have an indifferent and uncompassionate attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible radical egalitarian with many strong convictions.
Post by: Steelmagic on December 24, 2013, 01:25:37 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm all over the goddamn place. I speak somewhat similar to this area though.
Post by: Frumple on December 24, 2013, 01:28:24 am
... that said, yeah, it was about right, though I'm at least a couple hundred miles from any of the cities it mentioned.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: scrdest on December 24, 2013, 04:25:53 am
Post by: WealthyRadish on December 24, 2013, 04:28:58 am
Post by: 10ebbor10 on December 24, 2013, 04:32:29 am
Socialism 56.25
Tenderness 62.5
Your test scores indicate that you are a tender-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear neither committedly capitalist nor socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate realistic egalitarian with few strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Post by: penguinofhonor on December 24, 2013, 05:04:10 am
Socialism: 75
Tenderness: 50
Quote
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate realistic egalitarian with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Ultra-progressive is a good descriptor for me. I should use that sometime.
Spoiler: accent thing (click to show/hide)
I got tired of messing with the mobile site on my phone so I took a screenshot.
The test thought I was from Kentucky and I am, so nothing particularly interesting happened with the result. I did learn a lot of really interesting slang. There are such colorful terms for sun showers that I never would have thought of on my own.
Post by: Andrew425 on December 24, 2013, 05:42:32 am
Post by: Remuthra on December 24, 2013, 08:07:21 am
Post by: Mr Space Cat on December 24, 2013, 08:54:12 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's funny because I live in Texas, not California lululululul...although the little section of Texas I live in is a darker shade of red than the rest of it. huh.
Probably one of the deciding factors was the fact I don't say "y'all."
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 24, 2013, 09:17:39 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lagslayer on December 24, 2013, 10:01:28 am
Most of the map was a mishmash of orange-yellow. N and NE were blue/pale yellow/white . The greatest concentration of red was in the middle of the eastern seaboard. It predicted I was most likely in North Carolina, but I was actually in Virginia, which is still a deep red.
So I guess it sorta hit the nail on the head. For a while, It looked like it wasn't going to place me anywhere.
Post by: misko27 on December 24, 2013, 02:56:53 pm
Strong concentration near NYC and central New York. Medium concentration in rest of North-east, Colorado, central Florida. Light reds in the Central US, West coast, both ocean non-contiguous states. Closest three cities are NYC, Yonkers, Fort Lauderdale (that's in Florida!); least similar three are Little Rock, Montgomery and Bimingham.'
So someone from New York City speaks like someone from New York City? Madness!
Post by: MaximumZero on December 24, 2013, 08:03:57 pm
Spoiler: Dialect thing (click to show/hide)
How are any of you getting images? Nothing I've tried works.Right click, save picture, upload to imgur, post bbcode img here.
Post by: Vector on December 24, 2013, 08:05:46 pm
Post by: Frumple on December 24, 2013, 08:06:05 pm
How are any of you getting images? Nothing I've tried works.I just took a screen shot and uploaded it somewhere, m'self.
Post by: Karlito on December 24, 2013, 08:18:57 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
There were also a few questions I answered where the entire United States was blue. Not sure what's up with that.
Post by: Iceblaster on December 25, 2013, 01:57:24 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Even more hillarious is that my parents say I sound more like I'm from up north than I do from down south :P
Post by: Skyrunner on December 25, 2013, 04:41:26 am
I had a strongly San Jose dialect . Kinda makes sense considering I lived until second grade in Cali and moved to Korea two years after.
Post by: Ogdibus on December 25, 2013, 05:24:01 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I used to call it Coke, now I call it nothing. x3
Post by: Frumple on December 25, 2013, 05:39:38 am
Post by: Owlbread on December 25, 2013, 06:00:37 am
Post by: fivex on December 25, 2013, 06:45:29 am
Can anyone share the link to the accent thing? I did a different test earlier on and it told me I had a "neutral" American accent based on my vowels. The problem was it asked me something like "how do you say the A in pasta? A as in cat and hat or A as in father?" but I pronounce all those vowels the same way.Here (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/12/20/sunday-review/dialect-quiz-map.html?_r=0)
Post by: Haspen on December 25, 2013, 07:32:49 am
Well okay, San Francisco area is orange, but most of US is blue or deep blue :P
Post by: BFEL on December 25, 2013, 08:57:29 am
I'm apparently an incomprehensible alien to anyone but people living in Boston, Providence, Worcester and the most north-eastern state of US. Whatever its name is.Damn someone beat me to the "EVERYTHING IS BLUE" party. Although mine is pretty much all in pieces of Ohio (where I live) and Denver.
Well okay, San Francisco area is orange, but most of US is blue or deep blue :P
Post by: scriver on December 25, 2013, 09:01:34 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Apparently I speak like in Honolule, Boston, and.. I can't remember what the third one was. The one's I speak the least like was Des Moines and two Glove-State places.
Post by: AlleeCat on December 25, 2013, 09:18:46 am
Post by: Owlbread on December 25, 2013, 09:42:08 am
It's like southern Louisiana is this tiny section of the US where they speak a completely different language. Anyway, I'm not surprised I speak like a Californian since I was raised by Californians and so was my best friend who I spent my formative years hanging out with. Also I had no idea "rubbernecking" was even a thing but apparently it is and the entire world has a name for it...
Well, once upon a time they did. And some still do. Parlez-vous français?
Post by: misko27 on December 25, 2013, 11:38:01 am
Ehh, there are a lot of french up north by the new england border too, probably more; they don't speak all that differently. Meanwhile that small area of the Louisiana was the one most opposed to me, while even the rest of the South was only barely blue (I'm fairly universal as a speaker apparently.)It's like southern Louisiana is this tiny section of the US where they speak a completely different language. Anyway, I'm not surprised I speak like a Californian since I was raised by Californians and so was my best friend who I spent my formative years hanging out with. Also I had no idea "rubbernecking" was even a thing but apparently it is and the entire world has a name for it...
Well, once upon a time they did. And some still do. Parlez-vous français?
Anyway, asking my mom apparently a significant number of New Yorkers go to Fort Lauderdale, which explains why I had that specific place in Florida.
A answer that is totally blue only refers to how the US views your particular answer for a question: If no one else in the US answers like you do, you get a Blue map.
Can anyone share the link to the accent thing? I did a different test earlier on and it told me I had a "neutral" American accent based on my vowels. The problem was it asked me something like "how do you say the A in pasta? A as in cat and hat or A as in father?" but I pronounce all those vowels the same way.Ask and ye shall receive:
There's a New York Times survey that shows what regions of the US your dialect is most similar to: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/12/20/sunday-review/dialect-quiz-map.html (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/12/20/sunday-review/dialect-quiz-map.html)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: RedKing on December 25, 2013, 12:09:36 pm
It's placing me as most similar to Jackson, MS and Mobile/Birmingham, AL. I've *BEEN* to Jackson. I could barely understand half the people there.
It also places eastern North Carolina in almost the same shade of dark red, and I can firmly attest that while also nearly incomprehensible, the eastern NC accent is nothing like the Gulf Coast accent. And the Raleigh accent is utterly unlike the accent just 50 miles east, which is sort of a Tarheel version of Boomhauer from King of the Hill.
It also ignores situational accent shifts. I pronounce things differently and use different terminology at work than I do at home, and both differently than I do if I'm visiting rural family.
If I'm being "professional", I have very little regional accent.
If'n I'm visitin' kin down'n the country, then boy howdy I can lay it on thick.
Post by: Karlito on December 25, 2013, 12:12:12 pm
Post by: Bauglir on December 25, 2013, 12:19:21 pm
Post by: FearfulJesuit on December 25, 2013, 03:30:16 pm
I call bullshit on this study.
It's placing me as most similar to Jackson, MS and Mobile/Birmingham, AL. I've *BEEN* to Jackson. I could barely understand half the people there.
It also places eastern North Carolina in almost the same shade of dark red, and I can firmly attest that while also nearly incomprehensible, the eastern NC accent is nothing like the Gulf Coast accent. And the Raleigh accent is utterly unlike the accent just 50 miles east, which is sort of a Tarheel version of Boomhauer from King of the Hill.
It also ignores situational accent shifts. I pronounce things differently and use different terminology at work than I do at home, and both differently than I do if I'm visiting rural family.
If I'm being "professional", I have very little regional accent.
If'n I'm visitin' kin down'n the country, then boy howdy I can lay it on thick.
There's something else, too, which is a problem that linguists have had to deal with for decades: people are very, very bad at reporting how they actually speak. When you ask somebody to self-report on their own speech, they'll almost always say they speak closer to the standard than they actually do, especially if their natural speech is a stigmatized variant. William Labov (I think; he certainly did the "fourth floor" experiment, which is worth googling), who studied the Northern Cities Vowel Shift, did his damnedest to get examples of natural speech from speakers with the shift, using hidden tape recorders and that sort of thing. When he replayed the most advanced examples of the shift to speakers, they told him that nobody talked like that.
Post by: MonkeyHead on December 25, 2013, 04:04:58 pm
Spoiler: Long Live the Confederacy? (click to show/hide)
Well, that was unexpected.
Post by: Owlbread on December 25, 2013, 04:21:52 pm
For instance - I would call soda "juice" or "ginger", occasionally "fizzy drinks" but juice or ginger more often. I also call woodlice (the rolling bugs they talk about) "slaters". I also have no word for when it's raining and the sun is shining at the same time because in Scotland it just rains.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on December 25, 2013, 04:41:03 pm
Spoiler: Meanwhile, I'm all over the fucking place (click to show/hide)
i ain't even murikkan
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 25, 2013, 05:07:26 pm
It also places eastern North Carolina in almost the same shade of dark red, and I can firmly attest that while also nearly incomprehensible, the eastern NC accent is nothing like the Gulf Coast accent.Nothing, nothing even comes close to being as hard to understand as Gullah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullah_language) At least I can usually make out the words of foreign languages, even if I can't understand them.
Post by: Pwnzerfaust on December 25, 2013, 07:56:16 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
My three cities were Fremont, San Jose, and Santa Rosa. Fitting, because I live pretty much right between them.
Post by: Mictlantecuhtli on December 25, 2013, 08:10:03 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It really nailed it. I travel between Spokane and Boise often, actually.
Post by: WealthyRadish on December 25, 2013, 08:43:57 pm
Gullah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullah_language)
Apparently "nyam" is eat, or something.
Nom? Nyan? Internetese and Gullah, who knew.
Post by: alexandertnt on December 25, 2013, 09:33:19 pm
Spoiler: I live in Australia (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on December 25, 2013, 09:37:15 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on December 25, 2013, 10:12:21 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well then, my method of speaking isn't that unique.
Post by: Blargityblarg on December 26, 2013, 01:23:31 am
Post by: mastahcheese on December 26, 2013, 01:25:48 am
Which was a sweet, solid blue.
Post by: Lectorog on December 26, 2013, 01:46:07 am
"nyam" and "nom" would be an onomatopoeia for eating. The "Internetese" term came from somewhere, after all.Gullah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullah_language)Apparently "nyam" is eat, or something.
Nom? Nyan? Internetese and Gullah, who knew.
Post by: Owlbread on December 26, 2013, 04:17:25 pm
Nothing, nothing even comes close to being as hard to understand as Gullah. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gullah_language) At least I can usually make out the words of foreign languages, even if I can't understand them.
So you say, but try to understand this Moray man talking about trying to collect his raffle prize:
Quote
Aff ah gied awa ower by til awn fit wis certie richtfou mines
Wi sic a weirdfu thraw in life ah ootriggit masel up tae e nines
An yonder aboot fuan ah met e wife ah says "Mon noo quine fit hiv ah wan?"
Shae says "I'm sorry I don't understand, say, do you come from Bhutan?"
Post by: Cthulhu on December 26, 2013, 06:21:46 pm
Mine covered a lot of the western US, which makes sense because a lot of what I say doesn't match what most of the people around me say. Then there was a long trail from the west coast all the way to exactly where I live. Clever girl.
Post by: Wrex on December 26, 2013, 07:06:18 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Powder Miner on December 27, 2013, 07:31:38 am
Spoiler: big ol' image (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flying Dice on December 27, 2013, 02:49:11 pm
Post by: Lagslayer on December 27, 2013, 02:58:12 pm
Post by: Powder Miner on December 28, 2013, 12:26:16 pm
Post by: Putnam on December 28, 2013, 04:22:15 pm
Fucking NYT doesn't even know their etymology. It's ya'll, not y'all.
no? (https://www.google.com/search?q=ya'll&oq=ya'll&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60j69i65j69i60l2j69i59.679j0j7&sourceid=chrome&espv=210&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8)
Post by: Flying Dice on December 29, 2013, 03:32:03 am
Post by: Putnam on December 29, 2013, 04:12:27 am
Post by: Powder Miner on December 29, 2013, 10:18:29 am
(and when I say the entire internet, I mean the first page of google results :p)
Post by: Reudh on December 29, 2013, 10:57:21 am
ENFP
Extrovert(1%) iNtuitive(62%) Feeling(25%) Perceiving(6)%
Apparently the "Champion", though I could go either way as an INFP / "Healer" too.
And yeah, these Myers-Briggs things are pretty simplistic - i don't doubt if I'm in a depressive funk then my answers would probably be INTJ or INTP.
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 29, 2013, 06:55:36 pm
Spoiler: INTJ (click to show/hide)
Post by: ECrownofFire on December 30, 2013, 06:24:26 pm
Spoiler: Map (click to show/hide)
Post by: WarRoot on January 01, 2014, 06:44:49 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I guess it's quite ok, though I don't think I have a problem with religion, and I have no clue how to interpret that I'm a considerate radical centrist with few strong convictions.
Sounds like a bunch of conflicting stuff.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on January 01, 2014, 06:54:44 pm
(Shouldn't these tests be put on the first post? Took some time to dig up.)Probably, but I can't be bothered.
Post by: AlleeCat on January 01, 2014, 08:02:11 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on January 05, 2014, 07:11:14 am
Quote
The results are in! We reckon you're
10% northern
That's somewhere around Bournemouth.
Post by: Skyrunner on January 05, 2014, 07:16:01 am
Post by: alexandertnt on January 05, 2014, 07:30:30 am
That's somewhere around Oxford.
I have no idea what it means to be "northern" in Britain. Nor do I know what an oatcake is.
Post by: Mech#4 on January 05, 2014, 08:19:45 am
My curiosity is tingling:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, reminds me of this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_qjjZ2Y2SU)
Post by: sjm9876 on January 05, 2014, 08:37:52 am
Somewhere around Doncaster - about right, latitude-wise.
My curiosity is tingling:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Translation (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mech#4 on January 05, 2014, 09:45:24 am
@alexandertnt: Northern would be living close to the northern border of England, though not so far that you're in Scotland I believe. It's like, living in the narrow neck part of Britain.
Post by: MaximumZero on January 05, 2014, 10:02:58 am
Post by: Mr Space Cat on January 05, 2014, 10:36:05 am
"That's somewhere around Bournemouth."
Post by: Steelmagic on January 05, 2014, 12:36:33 pm
Somewhere around Oxford. So, apparently it's difficult for me to understand people from the north.
Post by: Elephant Parade on January 05, 2014, 01:36:26 pm
Somewhere around Oxford.
Post by: kaijyuu on January 05, 2014, 01:36:58 pm
Post by: Culise on January 05, 2014, 06:33:11 pm
Post by: Karlito on January 05, 2014, 06:44:13 pm
Post by: Reudh on January 06, 2014, 01:39:09 am
Hm, 60%. Apparently around Doncaster, which is funny because Doncaster is further east in the suburbs of Melbourne.
My curiosity is tingling:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, reminds me of this. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0_qjjZ2Y2SU)
Hey, I'm somewhat near Doncaster, the Melbourne one anyway.
I'm 80% northern, around York. (The amusing thing is, my english side is Southern, Northern and Cornish - Cornwall, Kent and Lancashire.)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on January 06, 2014, 01:47:54 am
Post by: Xanmyral on January 06, 2014, 02:04:54 am
Spoiler: Well, Okay Then I Guess (click to show/hide)
Quote
30% northern
That's somewhere around Oxford.
I did not understand a blasted thing in this test.
Post by: Gnorm on January 06, 2014, 02:19:53 am
Quote
Progressivism 12.5
Socialism 18.75
Tenderness 59.375
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-conservative; this is the political profile one might associate with a field hockey coach. It appears that you are accepting of religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a paleoconservative.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a uncompromising radical hereditarian with several strong convictions.
Apparently, I'm a hockey-coach.
Post by: Helgoland on January 06, 2014, 06:28:01 am
Post by: Max White on January 06, 2014, 06:29:50 am
Post by: Owlbread on January 06, 2014, 08:28:56 pm
If anyone was confused by the coat question - there's a reason why some people call string vests "Geordie Overcoats".
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 09, 2014, 04:03:32 pm
Spoiler: Previous Results (click to show/hide)
Been done a million times before, but I've got nothing better. (http://www.politicaltest.net/eng/test/)
My results are about what you'd expect. (http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/452122/)
Post by: Graknorke on February 09, 2014, 04:07:34 pm
I would hope so.
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 04:19:24 pm
Post by: Helgoland on February 09, 2014, 04:24:18 pm
Post by: Remuthra on February 09, 2014, 04:26:03 pm
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/452164_eng.jpg)
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 04:26:37 pm
Post by: MonkeyHead on February 09, 2014, 04:28:14 pm
http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/452165/
A secular, visionary, antropocentric communist.
Post by: Helgoland on February 09, 2014, 04:29:55 pm
Post by: Remuthra on February 09, 2014, 04:31:07 pm
Holy shit, do you just hate nature for no reason or did trees murder your extended family?
Spoiler: Obligatory (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutchling on February 09, 2014, 04:31:59 pm
fuckin' trees man
Post by: Elephant Parade on February 09, 2014, 04:33:56 pm
I actually care quite a bit about the environment. There weren't very many questions about it.
Post by: Remuthra on February 09, 2014, 04:34:49 pm
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 04:35:30 pm
You know I'm not even surprised, I'm sure some of you guys chop them down and burn into coal just to try and provoke the elves.
Post by: BFEL on February 09, 2014, 04:41:08 pm
So, y'know lets give him more info to work with :P
http://www.politicaltest.net/eng/test/
Post by: Remuthra on February 09, 2014, 04:47:45 pm
Post by: Lagslayer on February 09, 2014, 05:08:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: uber pye on February 09, 2014, 06:04:51 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
yeah, fuck trees and get out of my internet government!
Post by: kaijyuu on February 09, 2014, 06:22:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
A couple of the questions confused me and I didn't have any idea what the hell they were asking.
Post by: scrdest on February 09, 2014, 06:24:57 pm
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/452252_eng.jpg)
Post by: Elephant Parade on February 09, 2014, 06:28:31 pm
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 13 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 2 percent are more extremist than you.I found that to be the case as well. I figured them out, but they were poorly worded.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
A couple of the questions confused me and I didn't have any idea what the hell they were asking.
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 06:36:08 pm
Lifestyle and environmental protection do not exist as a dichotomy, but instead often have synergy.
Post by: Vector on February 09, 2014, 06:36:30 pm
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/452264_eng.jpg)
Alllllllllso when we're done with that one, I found a whole bank of good tests. The personality test here is actually worth taking (http://www.learnmyself.com/).
Here's my results (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1829110-1539052xs4hj2x3).
Post by: Dutchling on February 09, 2014, 06:39:55 pm
Lifestyle and environmental protection do not exist as a dichotomy, but instead often have synergy.Now I imagine you look (and talk) like this guy:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 06:41:43 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 09, 2014, 06:47:16 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
In this moment I am patriotic, not because of any phony state's blessing - but because I am enlightened by my liberalism.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 09, 2014, 06:49:20 pm
You are a Social Democrat . 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 23 percent are more extremist than you.You're a militarist? There's something I didn't expect.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Quote
Alllllllllso when we're done with that one, I found a whole bank of good tests. The personality test here is actually worth taking (http://www.learnmyself.com/).Oh boy, a whole profile of tests to fill out!
Here's my results (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1829110-1539052xs4hj2x3).
Post by: Dutchling on February 09, 2014, 06:54:14 pm
I look like the broken link image? Damn, that must be terrifying for you!oops. fixed it
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 06:57:02 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on February 09, 2014, 07:01:13 pm
You are a Social Democrat . 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 23 percent are more extremist than you.That test is so accurate it's creepy. It's almost entirely right, and I didn't even do the second set of questions.You're a militarist? There's something I didn't expect.Spoiler (click to show/hide)QuoteAlllllllllso when we're done with that one, I found a whole bank of good tests. The personality test here is actually worth taking (http://www.learnmyself.com/).Oh boy, a whole profile of tests to fill out!
Here's my results (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1829110-1539052xs4hj2x3).
It messed up on how I relate to others, but I'm kind of an odd case in that category.
Edit: Quotefail.
Post by: Gunner-Chan on February 09, 2014, 07:07:22 pm
Alllllllllso when we're done with that one, I found a whole bank of good tests. The personality test here is actually worth taking (http://www.learnmyself.com/).
Oooh. I actually enjoyed taking that one and reading the results. What I ended up with. (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x1922462-1634683xaa019x3#tab-1)
Post by: Vector on February 09, 2014, 07:15:32 pm
You are a Social Democrat . 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 23 percent are more extremist than you.You're a militarist? There's something I didn't expect.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not really, but I do think there are problems you just can't talk out. Though I might be pretty self-sacrificing on a personal level, on the level of a community... no, absolutely not.
Post by: kaijyuu on February 09, 2014, 07:19:37 pm
Alllllllllso when we're done with that one, I found a whole bank of good tests. The personality test here is actually worth taking (http://www.learnmyself.com/).My results from that test. (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=sPIx3x1922182-1634376xs4hj2x3)
Here's my results (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1829110-1539052xs4hj2x3).
Post by: Graknorke on February 09, 2014, 07:19:37 pm
Alllllllllso when we're done with that one, I found a whole bank of good tests. The personality test here is actually worth taking (http://www.learnmyself.com/).These test results were written by me in my sleep or something. They have to be, because there weren't even questions on half of the stuff mentioned.
Post by: alexandertnt on February 09, 2014, 07:35:47 pm
I thought I would have gotten a higher ecological score than that :-\
I'm all over the place for the personality test (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x1922947-1635222xdf129x3#tab-1)
Post by: Putnam on February 09, 2014, 07:47:13 pm
Post by: Ogdibus on February 09, 2014, 07:49:48 pm
The test: (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1923287-1635434xa5a53x3#tab-1)
Edit: I got a 3 for friendliness. x3
Post by: WealthyRadish on February 09, 2014, 07:49:48 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
7% are more extremist, damn. Surprised it's not 100% secular, if that's even possible in this test.
Post by: Elephant Parade on February 09, 2014, 07:54:41 pm
Spoiler: Results of new test (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on February 09, 2014, 07:56:02 pm
O hai thurr!!
The test: (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1923287-1635434xa5a53x3#tab-1)
Edit: I got a 3 for friendliness. x3
Seeing yours, I feel a lot better about my "cheerfulness" score of 2 .-.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 09, 2014, 07:59:37 pm
Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1922181-1634502xs4hj2x3)
IQ (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=sIQx3x1922181-350666xs4hj2x1)
Relationship (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=MAQx3x1922181-142246xs4hj2x1)
Optimism/Pessimism (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=LOTx3x1922181-51186x7d8EDx1#tab-1)
Motivation (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=MBx3x1922181-88381xs4hj2x1)
Depression (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=CESDx3x1922181-20191x6F4fex1)
Career (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=CAREERx3x1922181-44823xs4hj2x1)
Life Goals (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=WASSUPx3x1922181-38750xs4hj2x1)
Stress (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=COPEx3x1922181-52080xs4hj2x1)
Post by: Iceblaster on February 09, 2014, 08:05:30 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
SOooo yeah :P
PRE-POST EDIT:
Also this:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I didn't expect that hehe.
However once again, internet test and all.
DAMNIT TOO MANY TESTS... will add them in edits...
Post by: Ogdibus on February 09, 2014, 08:16:59 pm
Quote from: OgdibusO hai thurr!!
The test:
Edit: I got a 3 for friendliness. x3
Seeing yours, I feel a lot better about my "cheerfulness" score of 2 .-.
It was kind of startling to see that, but it seems like a natural outcome of your circumstances.
We need to hang out with Kaijuu, apparently.
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 09, 2014, 08:19:03 pm
Sounds suspiciously DF-like in its structure.Spoiler: Results of new test (click to show/hide)
Post by: Frumple on February 09, 2014, 08:24:30 pm
Also political one, (http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/452117/) because politicubes are great.
Post by: GreatJustice on February 09, 2014, 08:29:59 pm
So I'm a Liberal, presumably in the European sense. That test had same really annoying questions that are tricky to answer due to vagueness, though, so I'd say it doesn't necessarily count for much.
Post by: Mictlantecuhtli on February 09, 2014, 08:30:21 pm
Post by: Bauglir on February 09, 2014, 08:34:46 pm
Also.
Quote
You regard intellectual exercises as a waste of your time.
Excuse me while I die laughing. Though that was, by a wide margin, the greatest divergence from reality that I could detect (although then again... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forer_effect)).
Post by: Remuthra on February 09, 2014, 08:38:10 pm
Spoiler: I am the Architect. (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 08:40:37 pm
You know being The Championtm isn't actually as good as they made it out to be.
Post by: Ogdibus on February 09, 2014, 08:54:58 pm
Edit: and a pnp RPG, and an MMORPG
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 09, 2014, 08:55:51 pm
Post by: Ogdibus on February 09, 2014, 08:59:40 pm
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 08:59:52 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on February 09, 2014, 09:02:14 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on February 09, 2014, 09:17:42 pm
Spoiler: Social Democratic Cosmopolitan (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: The Composer (click to show/hide)
I totally wish they woulda nicknamed one of the personality types 'The Contender (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_qPHC6JxbQ)'.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 09, 2014, 09:26:38 pm
Battery complete!Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x1925031-1637576xdd785x3#tab-2)
Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1922181-1634502xs4hj2x3)
Compare. Discuss.
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 09:30:30 pm
Well the numbers are in and you both continue to be essensially the same person, except MSH is much more agreeable... So you know, have fun with that.Battery complete!Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x1925031-1637576xdd785x3#tab-2)
Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1922181-1634502xs4hj2x3)
Compare. Discuss.
Post by: Gnorm on February 09, 2014, 09:33:27 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on February 09, 2014, 09:34:35 pm
Battery complete!Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x1925031-1637576xdd785x3#tab-2)
Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1922181-1634502xs4hj2x3)
Compare. Discuss.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 09, 2014, 09:38:28 pm
The two largest gaps seem to be Immoderation (MSH 2, MZ 48) and Orderliness (MSH 98, MZ 1).Well the numbers are in and you both continue to be essensially the same person, except MSH is much more agreeable... So you know, have fun with that.Battery complete!Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x1925031-1637576xdd785x3#tab-2)
Personality (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x1922181-1634502xs4hj2x3)
Compare. Discuss.
Post by: Aqizzar on February 09, 2014, 09:39:00 pm
Andy Warhol, David Lynch, Tori Amos, Robert Pattison, and John Kerry. Boy, what a swinging party.
Honestly, I feel this test's assessment is just regurgitating whatever you answered, point for point. Moreso than a personality test usually would that is.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 09, 2014, 09:40:58 pm
Honestly, I feel this test's assessment is just regurgitating whatever you answered, point for point. Moreso than a personality test usually would that is.Probably, but that's because it's hard to go much farther than that in personality tests before they become total bullshit. It's worth noting that Big Five is the only major personality test to have been empirically verified, even though it does little more than put your personality in an observable format.
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 09:59:57 pm
Andy Warhol, David Lynch, Tori Amos, Robert Pattison, and John Kerry. Boy, what a swinging party.At least you got interesting people. I got Anne Frank, and look how that turned out for her. You can't even joke about that, but David Lynch practically invites it!
Post by: Ogdibus on February 09, 2014, 10:13:10 pm
The test also says that I have A strong will on page nine, but rates my self discipline, (which it describes as willpower,) at 10?! That was a little odd. x3
Post by: MaximumZero on February 09, 2014, 10:30:10 pm
Post by: Aqizzar on February 09, 2014, 10:30:45 pm
Andy Warhol, David Lynch, Tori Amos, Robert Pattison, and John Kerry. Boy, what a swinging party.At least you got interesting people. I got Anne Frank, and look how that turned out for her. You can't even joke about that, but David Lynch practically invites it!
How did somebody get Anne Frank to take a personality test? Really want to know what they were operating on there.
Post by: Max White on February 09, 2014, 10:33:54 pm
How did somebody get Anne Frank to take a personality test? Really want to know what they were operating on there.I believe the study was done by the Justin Bieber Collage of Personollogy. Want to know what Alan Turings favorite facebook game would have been?
Post by: alexandertnt on February 09, 2014, 11:21:21 pm
Relationship (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=MAQx3x1922947-142568xb9408x1). Sounds about right.
Motivation (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=MBx3x1922947-88450x4550ax1). "The offer of a reward (such as a promotion for working hard or winning a bet) will keep you motivated to complete difficult activities" is pretty much completely incorrect.
Success (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=WASSUPx3x1922947-38807x3a5c1x1). About right.
Optimism (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=LOTx3x1922947-51270xbdDdBx1). I dont think im that pessimistic.
Career (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=CAREERx3x1922947-44961xd7fAEx1#tab-1). "Coach" is on there, despite being one of the last things I would want to do.
Self Perception (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=MBAx3x1922947-68095xD6436x1). Just a flat zero, sounds about right.
Depression (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=CESDx3x1922947-20340x8f1F0x1). At least I'm not at risk of suicide.
Post by: Lagslayer on February 09, 2014, 11:34:16 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on February 09, 2014, 11:39:57 pm
Spoiler: Personality (click to show/hide)
Post by: Aqizzar on February 09, 2014, 11:44:03 pm
Quote
It would be good for the public authorities to pay their debts no longer.
I have no idea what this statement is trying to ask me. I don't even know if this is English.
Quote
Even small delicts should be punished rigorously to prevent rampant crime.
Okay now I know this test is fucking with... 'Delict' is really a word? Well, learn something new every day.
Apparently you can submit questions. That explains a lot.
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/452463_eng.jpg)
Nuke the whales! I didn't expect it to be that pronounced
Post by: Culise on February 09, 2014, 11:56:43 pm
I think the first one is basically trying to ask, "Should governments default?" (though possibly with a more general emphasis on "debts" than just the monetary meaning) and the second one is basically just asking about either misdemeanors or wrongs to be redressed through civil law (as opposed to criminal law, for those who don't operate in a common law system). That first one was really badly written, and I had to look up "delict," too.QuoteIt would be good for the public authorities to pay their debts no longer.
I have no idea what this statement is trying to ask me. I don't even know if this is English.QuoteEven small delicts should be punished rigorously to prevent rampant crime.
Okay now I know this test is fucking with... 'Delict' is really a word? Well, learn something new every day.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on February 10, 2014, 12:33:30 am
oh wait there's a whole array of tests?
not happening
yet at least
i scored a big fat three on extraversion too this is amazing
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 10, 2014, 01:06:13 am
Spoiler: Personality (click to show/hide)
Post by: Guardian G.I. on February 10, 2014, 02:13:00 am
Quote
Your Personality Type is The Composer (RICAS)
Composers are emotionally reactive, which means that they experience their emotions strongly and can be very passionate., however also have a higher tendency to experience emotions such as anxiety, anger and depression. Due to their independence and reserve, sometimes the Composer can be perceived as arrogant or unfriendly, however this is merely because they don't require the same level of social stimulation or interaction that others may seek. The Composer generally prefers fact over fiction and security and stability over ambiguity and disorder. Sticking with convention and familiar routines is generally best. With a sense of social responsibility and a general trust in others, Composers are often seen as sincere and generous. However the Composer has a refreshing impulsiveness about them, they tend to dislike too many rules and regulations and can be casual and whimsical.
4.6% of people are Composers
Apparently, celebrities similar to me are Harrison Ford, Clint Eastwood, Steve Jobs, Bruce Lee and Tom Cruise.
Post by: scrdest on February 10, 2014, 04:33:48 am
Post by: Funk on February 10, 2014, 08:21:50 am
i wounder what my idea of a Guaranteed minimum income and no minimum wage would go down as with this test?
Well im a cosmopolitan Social Democrat (http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/452707/)
Post by: Funk on February 10, 2014, 08:37:17 am
Right o' chaps, the question for all time: How northern are you? (http://games.usvsth3m.com/north-o-meter/)The results are in! We reckon you're
95% northern
That's somewhere around Middlesbrough.
Strangely thats half way from where my parents grow up .
Post by: Arx on February 10, 2014, 01:00:10 pm
Quote
Your concern about rejection and ridicule cause you to feel shy and uncomfortable around others. You are easily embarrassed and often feel ashamed.This along with "You panic and feel helpless under stress" are the major reality deviations. Sure I'm uncomfortable, but I don't particularly care about whether they reject me.
Otherwise all pretty close-- I took the extended version, which is basically the same questions phrased differently to see where your answers change.
Post by: PanH on February 10, 2014, 01:15:48 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutchling on February 10, 2014, 02:17:23 pm
Quote
[Y]ou are sensitive about what others think of you. Your concern about rejection and ridicule cause you to feel shy and uncomfortable around others. You are easily embarrassed and often feel ashamed. Your fears that others will criticize or make fun of you are exaggerated and unrealistic, but your awkwardness and discomfort may make these fears a self-fulfilling prophecy.No shit Sherlock
Post by: sjm9876 on February 10, 2014, 03:07:45 pm
To be fair, most bits are accurate, but:
Quote
general trust in others.... Hilarious.
I'm also unsure whether 'very passionate' can be applied to me, although in all honesty that's more my refusal to show anything than anything else.
Part 3 is far more accurate, reading on. I'll read the rest later.
On the subject of my sensitivity to art, I should make clear that I was including things such as novels, lore, etc.... as art. I don't care about paintings etc... very much, unless it has some direct relation to me (ie. not of a random stranger)
I'm also curious as to how many people have taken this test, and how specific it is in comparisons - if only 7 people are like me, is that many or few?
Post by: Kansa on February 10, 2014, 03:19:44 pm
Apparently I am a composer
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on February 10, 2014, 04:54:47 pm
Post by: GreatJustice on February 10, 2014, 04:55:55 pm
I answered a lot with less strong opinions a lot, hence why almost everything lands in the 30-60% range (barring modesty and progressiveness apparently). I'd say this is more accurate than a lot of personality tests, anyway.
Post by: Remuthra on February 10, 2014, 07:08:21 pm
Yay i'm the only visionary!I see.
Post by: GreatJustice on February 10, 2014, 07:12:45 pm
Yay i'm the only visionary!I see.
You deserve to be shot for a pun that bad. I'm calling the Pun Police on this one.
Post by: BFEL on February 10, 2014, 07:33:31 pm
I am THE DESIGNER.
Post by: Powder Miner on February 10, 2014, 08:21:02 pm
'pparently i be shamanizing up in here
(though i don't match the "dislikes rules and regulations" part of it... at all, really)
Also, it says I'm not tempted to overindulge, which is hilarious. Hilariously untrue.
...and i think my friendliness score is too low :c
Rambling aside, like any personality test it misses things, but gets some things very right!
Post by: Jelle on February 11, 2014, 08:33:17 am
Here's my results (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1944726-1658402x67bFEx3#tab-1).
"Your Personality Type is The Designer
Strengths VS Weaknesses Likes adventure, Moslty careful, Good self discipline, Not very cheerful, Not in touch with emotions.
You're Kinda Like Charles Darwin, Abraham Lincoln, Franz Kafka, Milton Friedman, Marie Curie, Tina Fey, Sigourney Weave, Asia Carrera, Leo Strauss, D.T Suzuki"
IQ thingy (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sIQx3x1944726-355428x67bFEx1)
"you have excellent word comprehension skills and perform extremely well at language based tasks"
Hahahahah... Haahaaaaahaaha. HaaHAAHAAAAAHAA. BWAAAHAAAGHAAAAGHAAAAA.
Excuse me.
Post by: sebcool on February 11, 2014, 09:40:12 am
http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1945136-1658816x26eDDx3#tab-2
I don't think this thing is very accurate, I never really considered myself emotiona- *checks the Neuroticism tab* Nevermind, I get it now :P
This thing just made my day :)
Post by: kaijyuu on February 11, 2014, 11:43:54 am
New result:
Quote
You are an anarcho-collectivistic. 0 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 1 percent are more extremist than you.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: vagel7 on February 11, 2014, 01:05:11 pm
http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1946925-1660621x5f4D6x3#tab-2 (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1946925-1660621x5f4D6x3#tab-2)
Post by: sebcool on February 12, 2014, 02:17:53 pm
http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=PIx3x1959481-1673466x57b17x3#tab-3
I sense a pattern here. . .
Post by: Solifuge on February 13, 2014, 02:35:30 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/u9zX8i3.png)
Huzzah for no Self Discipline, or respect for Convention? Weeeeeeeeeeee!
** You can tell how much I don't care about convention judging by how many e's I put at the end of the above sentence, and my Non-Standard Use Of Capitalization. I'm clearly a loose cannon who doesn't play by the rules.
Spoiler: Infographics are fun: (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: How do these even work I mean really :I (click to show/hide)
Okay, so apparently Morality is about Sincerity versus Deception. I could see that... but at least it's Altruistic Deceptiveness, right? Man, and how about that Dutifulness! What's that, 67% Self-Consciousness and 77% Vulnerability? This makes me quantifiably the worst person ever? You are probably right! Nevertheless, judging by the folks it linked me with (Heath Ledger, Virginia Woolf, and Kurt Cobain featuring prominently when I refresh the infographic page) I'm on a whimsical journey through a life of isolated and all-consuming creativity with a 40% chance of burnout and self-destruction. It is going to be magical! :D :D :D
Post by: Eagle_eye on February 16, 2014, 10:14:27 pm
http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/458226/ (http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/458226/)
Big 5:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah, no, that's.. not right. Reserved, prone to depression, yes. Conventional and trusting? Definitely not.
IQ
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Uh, ok then. I'm smart, but I kind of doubt I'm that smart. I've met too many people noticeably smarter than me for the statistics to work out. And there's no way in hell my memory is only average. My memory for meaningless numbers, maybe.
Relationships
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Optimism
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nothing surprising there.
Motivation
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah, sounds about right.
Depression
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Body Image
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
shocking.
Careers..?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Ok, the fact that I don't like the idea of interacting with people at work doesn't mean I'm not altruistic. Right..?
These are getting sort of boring, so I think I'm done.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on February 17, 2014, 01:04:39 am
I particularly liked how I got 1 on extraversion. Not totally introverted, then. That sounds like a good balance.
Spoiler: My general thoughts on this test (click to show/hide)
Also, Solifuge, I am so jealous of you being "kinda like" Kurt Cobain. Like, dood. I'll trade you Tim Burton for Kurt Cobain.
Post by: The Fool on February 17, 2014, 01:18:15 am
I was The Leader (BEOAS). Which I agree with. I don't always want to take control, especially when I know little of what's happening, but when I do I do well. My personality has definitely changed since a few years ago, but that's not a bad thing. I'm definitely more open about everything now, and no topic is out of bounds unless someone else says so.
Spoiler: Overall (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Strengths and Weaknesses (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Who I'm Like (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on February 17, 2014, 01:51:15 am
I'm balancedly introextroverted. Woohoo?
I literally thought I'm guarded. Huh.
Spoiler: But I like this part (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: And I like how this defines my primary characteristics-ish (click to show/hide)
Post by: Reudh on February 17, 2014, 02:04:06 am
I'm a "Prophet". (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?u=sPIx3x2012529-1729202x78f67x3#tab-1)
I did this when I was feeling pretty shitty, though, so it might be a bit coloured.
Post by: sjm9876 on February 17, 2014, 07:05:54 am
Post by: My Name is Immaterial on February 18, 2014, 05:22:20 pm
Edit: Oh, and I did the personality test from the original post. INTJ (78%, 25%, 25%, 56%).
Post by: Arx on February 19, 2014, 03:58:21 am
Also I apparently have 'superb' spatial relations. Not entirely surprised at that, as I practice that on small objects moving at high speed a lot.
Post by: Wwolin on February 20, 2014, 12:49:32 am
This is actually really damned accurate for me. Peaceful, orderly, and happy.
Post by: Knit tie on March 19, 2014, 01:26:12 pm
Seriously, that is so me. Can't self-organise for shit, don't bother with puzzles and am constantly imagining the worst that could happen, but tell me that you need a shirt and I'll rip mine off and give it to you.
Post by: Darvi on March 19, 2014, 02:28:01 pm
Spoiler: I am a...n Artisan? (click to show/hide)
Post by: Knit tie on March 19, 2014, 02:48:29 pm
Post by: My Name is Immaterial on March 19, 2014, 02:48:49 pm
Post by: Dutchling on March 19, 2014, 02:50:15 pm
At least, some of your incarnations are.
Post by: Darvi on March 19, 2014, 03:41:20 pm
Well, you're like the Dali Lama, Darvi. That's something.
Spoiler: Darvi Llama (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaian-a-coel on March 19, 2014, 03:55:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Summary:
Neuroticism: Except for anxiety and self-consciousness, I'm a vulcan. Mostly. Sounds about right.
Extravertism: Fuck people.
Openness: Routine is good, but sometimes I need new things. Spot on. Imagination and intellect in orbit. Also fuck art, apparently.
Agreeableness: Who said fuck people? Fuck strangers. Though it might be a bit exagerated since I keep to myself, I have a golden heart.
Conscientiousness: Procrastinatioooooooooooooooooooon. Cautiousness high tho.
Overview in spoilers. I'm unique. Almost.
Post by: Tawa on March 19, 2014, 04:36:32 pm
Healer.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Sweeet.
Also, my IQ is 156 according to a completely different test.
EDIT:
Yay, I'm a healer! (http://www.learnmyself.com/Personality-Report?x=PIx3x2873152-2735028xs4hj2x3)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Summary:
Neuroticism: Except for anxiety and self-consciousness, I'm a vulcan. Mostly. Sounds about right.
Extravertism: Fuck people.
Openness: Routine is good, but sometimes I need new things. Spot on. Imagination and intellect in orbit. Also fuck art, apparently.
Agreeableness: Who said fuck people? Fuck strangers. Though it might be a bit exagerated since I keep to myself, I have a golden heart.
Conscientiousness: Procrastinatioooooooooooooooooooon. Cautiousness high tho.
Overview in spoilers. I'm unique. Almost.
Apparently we're the exact same person.
Hello, me.
MOREEDIT:
Apparently Tiruin is "kinda like" Morgan Freeman.
I never want to play Mafia against Morgan Freeman.
Post by: Talvieno on March 19, 2014, 04:41:26 pm
Introvert(67%) Sensing(1%) Feeling(38%) Judging(1%)
You have distinctive preference of Introversion over Extraversion (67%)
You have marginal or no preference of Sensing over Intuition (1%)
You have moderate preference of Feeling over Thinking (38%)
You have marginal or no preference of Judging over Perceiving (1%)
I find it interesting I got two at 1% out of the four.
edit: for the other one:
RIOAD (the instructor) (whaaa?)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mr Space Cat on March 19, 2014, 05:37:17 pm
Yikes, this makes me look almost suicidally depressed. I don't usually feel that way, though.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Check out my score for depression.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I imagine that as far as this graph doohicky goes, "depression" is used to refer to multiple traits besides just "depression" itself.
Post by: penguinofhonor on March 19, 2014, 06:22:05 pm
Quote
Your Personality Type is The Producer (BICAS)
Producers are emotionally balanced, which means that they are less prone to depression and are able to cope well with feelings of anxiety, anger and vulnerability. Due to their independence and reserve, sometimes the Producer can be perceived as arrogant or unfriendly, however this is merely because they don't require the same level of social stimulation or interaction that others may seek. The Producer generally prefers fact over fiction and security and stability over ambiguity and disorder. Sticking with convention and familiar routines is generally best. With a sense of social responsibility and a general trust in others, Producers are often seen as sincere and generous. However the Producer has a refreshing impulsiveness about them, they tend to dislike too many rules and regulations and can be casual and whimsical.
Considering I hit "Strongly Agree" on anything that mentioned trying new things and "Strongly Disagree" on anything that mentioned sticking to the known or familiar, I really question this test for giving me a result that includes "Sticking with convention or familiar routines is generally best." The rest seems relatively accurate though.
Post by: alexandertnt on March 19, 2014, 06:32:52 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: werty892 on March 19, 2014, 07:28:53 pm
Post by: Zangi on March 19, 2014, 08:29:45 pm
Quote
Craftsmen are emotionally balanced, which means that they are less prone to depression and are able to cope well with feelings of anxiety, anger and vulnerability. Due to their independence and reserve, sometimes the Craftsman can be perceived as arrogant or unfriendly, however this is merely because they don't require the same level of social stimulation or interaction that others may seek. The Craftsman generally prefers fact over fiction and security and stability over ambiguity and disorder. Sticking with convention and familiar routines is generally best. With a healthy skepticism of the motives of others, and a belief in justice and being self made, sometimes the Craftsman can come across as guarded or intimidating. However the Craftsman has a refreshing impulsiveness about them, they tend to dislike too many rules and regulations and can be casual and whimsical.
3.05% of people are Craftsmen
Post by: Helgoland on March 19, 2014, 10:07:12 pm
High score of depression and friendliness. Ridiculously low score on self-discipline.
Sounds about right.
Post by: Criptfeind on March 19, 2014, 11:24:08 pm
Depression: 99%
Modesty: 100%
Imagination: 82%
Adventurous: 11%
Trust: 1%
Friendliness: 0%
Interestingly even with 100% Modesty I got a overall score of 0% in it's category of Agreeableness, since everything else was 0-2% (Except for Cooperation at a low 18%)
Big five overview is 98% Neuroticism, 24% Openness to Experience, and the others are 0-1%. All the little blurbs at the bottom of the charts are basically correct.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on March 20, 2014, 12:01:03 am
Quote
Instructors are emotionally reactive, which means that they experience their emotions strongly and can be very passionate., however also have a higher tendency to experience emotions such as anxiety, anger and depression. Due to their independence and reserve, sometimes the Instructor can be perceived as arrogant or unfriendly, however this is merely because they don't require the same level of social stimulation or interaction that others may seek. The Instructor enjoys a good balance between the real world and fantasy, they are mostly aware of and in touch with their emotions. Being open-minded to new and unusual ideas helps them to interact with the world. With a sense of social responsibility and a general trust in others, Instructors are often seen as sincere and generous. However the Instructor generally has good self discipline and is recognized as being able to plan and think ahead.
Entirely unsurprising, as are the numbers:
86% Imagination
52% Adventurous
62% Depression
5% Friendliness
50% Modesty
39% Trust
I am apparently similar to Angela Merkel, Augustus, and Paul Krugman.
Post by: Vector on March 26, 2014, 11:07:18 pm
My feet are Roman with a side helping of Greco (The first three toes are just about even, then the other two scurry backwards). How 'bout yours?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 26, 2014, 11:12:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Totally Egyptian, though not at that extreme of an angle. So Egyptian-Roman I guess, which clearly shows how much better I am than all these plebeians. Also, holy Rome-centric categorization, Batman!
Post by: MaximumZero on March 26, 2014, 11:13:23 pm
Post by: Mr Space Cat on March 26, 2014, 11:13:54 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 26, 2014, 11:15:55 pm
Totally Egyptian, though not at that extreme of an angle
Greek, all the way.What did you do.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on March 26, 2014, 11:17:10 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on March 26, 2014, 11:21:15 pm
Also, that is insanely eurocentric, which might be the problem I guess?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 26, 2014, 11:23:14 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on March 26, 2014, 11:24:41 pm
Also my feet are... Not on that list sorta? Maybe Roman/Celtic?
Post by: Lagslayer on March 26, 2014, 11:25:24 pm
But I've suspected for a long time now that my feet are really weird.
Greek is weird, but has a little sense to it. Celtic is just "I forgot how to foot".
Post by: Tiruin on March 26, 2014, 11:27:35 pm
(https://31.media.tumblr.com/1f5cf363676c90732a60778e51c7bae4/tumblr_n2rkh4mqkp1r8hg1ho1_500.jpg)My feet.
My feet are Roman with a side helping of Greco (The first three toes are just about even, then the other two scurry backwards). How 'bout yours?
Aren't.
Any of the darn above.
Why must this all be European?! D:
Ok, most likely Roman, but they shorten by an outwards curve from the big toe to the little toe.
A mix of Egyptian and Roman? Not linear, but curved. Low curve at the first two toes then dropping sharply on the last two toes.
Post by: Frumple on March 26, 2014, 11:30:06 pm
Post by: Kedly on March 26, 2014, 11:30:25 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 26, 2014, 11:31:54 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on March 26, 2014, 11:32:47 pm
My wife has a more Roman foot, and doesn't form left or right socks.
Post by: Criptfeind on March 26, 2014, 11:33:25 pm
Post by: Darvi on March 26, 2014, 11:35:25 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on March 26, 2014, 11:36:46 pm
Can I just add, my nails are not nearly that neat.Yeah, this.
My nails are all deformed looking.
Except the ones that are actually deformed through stuff like injuries.
Post by: Kedly on March 26, 2014, 11:38:37 pm
Are you saying your deformed toe nails look normal, and your normal toenails look deformed?Can I just add, my nails are not nearly that neat.Yeah, this.
My nails are all deformed looking.
Except the ones that are actually deformed through stuff like injuries.
Post by: GlyphGryph on March 26, 2014, 11:46:58 pm
I don't have claw feet, but they are at least semi-prehensile. I can grasp objects with them, but I can't play video games with them, essentially.
I once played two people I knew "2v2" by playing one controller with my feet and one with my hands.
I won! :D
Was such a happy day.
Post by: mastahcheese on March 26, 2014, 11:49:41 pm
Somewhat, yes.Are you saying your deformed toe nails look normal, and your normal toenails look deformed?Can I just add, my nails are not nearly that neat.Yeah, this.
My nails are all deformed looking.
Except the ones that are actually deformed through stuff like injuries.
Post by: Kedly on March 26, 2014, 11:50:12 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on March 26, 2014, 11:54:28 pm
Am I weird for thinking that is awesome? =PI don't think so, nope.
It seems like all the parts of me that should get messed up all look normal, and then I'm just weird in random places.
Like how my nose is so crooked that you can see the cartilage over to one side, that's just weird, man.
Post by: MaximumZero on March 26, 2014, 11:58:41 pm
Kickboxing. Dur.Totally Egyptian, though not at that extreme of an angleGreek, all the way.What did you do.
Post by: My Name is Immaterial on March 27, 2014, 12:03:13 am
Post by: Tiruin on March 27, 2014, 12:09:03 am
Your feet are awesome.I don't have claw feet, but they are at least semi-prehensile. I can grasp objects with them, but I can't play video games with them, essentially.
I once played two people I knew "2v2" by playing one controller with my feet and one with my hands.
I won! :D
Was such a happy day.
Bahahahaha, my nose is slanted in such a way that it looks normal from right side view. >_<Am I weird for thinking that is awesome? =PI don't think so, nope.
It seems like all the parts of me that should get messed up all look normal, and then I'm just weird in random places.
Like how my nose is so crooked that you can see the cartilage over to one side, that's just weird, man.
Though I'm real curious on the site we're getting our Feet info based on. No Asian roots or such?
Post by: mastahcheese on March 27, 2014, 12:11:45 am
Heh, my nose looks pretty normal from any side except when you look at it from below, and then it's obvious, that's part of why I tend to look down all the time, so people don't notice.It seems like all the parts of me that should get messed up all look normal, and then I'm just weird in random places.Bahahahaha, my nose is slanted in such a way that it looks normal from right side view. >_<
Like how my nose is so crooked that you can see the cartilage over to one side, that's just weird, man.
Though I'm real curious on the site we're getting our Feet info based on. No Asian roots or such?
And yeah, there isn't enough choices or origins on the thing.
Post by: Vector on March 27, 2014, 12:13:04 am
Post by: razor871 on March 27, 2014, 12:16:39 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
•You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (100%)
•You have moderate preference of Sensing over Intuition (50%)
•You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (38%)
•You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (11%)
Post by: razor871 on March 27, 2014, 12:17:44 am
Post by: mastahcheese on March 27, 2014, 12:19:21 am
That said, I still haven't done so.
Post by: Tiruin on March 27, 2014, 12:21:42 am
Yeah, I just got it off of tumblr! Mostly I want to know what everybody's feet is shaped like, and this seemed like a good way to get that data :>Well you're getting everything and feet. :P
Though most people here in my area are along the line of mixed Egyptian and Roman.
I...just remember. I don't know why.
Post by: razor871 on March 27, 2014, 12:24:54 am
Post by: Descan on March 27, 2014, 12:33:47 am
Apparently I'm one of the people of the Nile, not a son of the Highlands. What heresy is this?
Post by: mastahcheese on March 27, 2014, 12:38:19 am
This thing seems incredibly silly.If you have a deformed nose, you can still join me and Tiruin.
Apparently I'm one of the people of the Nile, not a son of the Highlands. What heresy is this?
Post by: Cheeetar on March 27, 2014, 01:10:23 am
Post by: Tarran on March 27, 2014, 01:13:03 am
Problem: My mother is definitely extremely (southern) Chinese, while my father is some very liberal mix of European (which I don't think includes much if any Italian, and probably no Egyptian). So that picture unfortunately tells me absolutely nothing of my roots.
Post by: alexandertnt on March 27, 2014, 02:25:23 am
Post by: scrdest on March 27, 2014, 02:30:57 am
Post by: Helgoland on March 27, 2014, 05:48:49 am
A friend of mine used to laugh himself silly over my weird toes.
Post by: Haspen on March 27, 2014, 06:04:24 am
Post by: Knit tie on March 27, 2014, 06:26:26 am
Post by: DJ on March 27, 2014, 07:02:34 am
Post by: NobodyPro on March 27, 2014, 07:07:53 am
Post by: Jelle on March 27, 2014, 07:58:05 am
Some people actually have feet like those german and celtic ones? :o
Post by: miauw62 on March 27, 2014, 08:00:13 am
Post by: Helgoland on March 27, 2014, 10:30:31 am
I see no option for toes like fingers (http://i.imgur.com/bKutSh4.png).Oooh, another person with monkey feet! They're incredible useful when you're too lazy to bend over.
Post by: Talvieno on March 27, 2014, 10:34:50 am
Post by: Itnetlolor on March 27, 2014, 11:36:01 am
If I was more fit and less lazy, I would do pretty well with freerunning or evasion with that setup. At least where any involvement is from the knees down.
Post by: MonkeyHead on March 27, 2014, 12:15:22 pm
Post by: scriver on March 27, 2014, 12:42:55 pm
Post by: werty892 on March 27, 2014, 02:48:38 pm
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on March 27, 2014, 03:11:36 pm
Post by: LeoLeonardoIII on March 27, 2014, 04:23:14 pm
Post by: Tawa on March 27, 2014, 04:39:45 pm
Whaaaa...?
Post by: LeoLeonardoIII on March 27, 2014, 06:45:18 pm
Post by: Knit tie on March 27, 2014, 06:51:19 pm
Post by: Tarran on March 27, 2014, 10:24:40 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on March 27, 2014, 11:05:56 pm
Post by: Mr Space Cat on March 28, 2014, 12:46:54 am
Today I learned I have egyptian monkey feet.I see no option for toes like fingers (http://i.imgur.com/bKutSh4.png).Oooh, another person with monkey feet! They're incredible useful when you're too lazy to bend over.
Post by: LeoLeonardoIII on March 28, 2014, 03:00:46 pm
Post by: Knit tie on March 28, 2014, 03:30:33 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on March 28, 2014, 03:37:04 pm
... probably.
Post by: LeoLeonardoIII on March 28, 2014, 05:09:07 pm
But I still think the better way to do it is to use sleight of hand, pretie the stem when she isn't looking, grip the knot between your fingertips, put the cherry stem in your mouth, swish it around for a few seconds, and show it off. A much better trick would be putting nothing in your mouth, and "pulling out" a previously-palmed flower or something.
Post by: SquatchHammer on April 03, 2014, 02:43:07 am
INTJ
Introvert(67%) iNtuitive(25%) Thinking(1%) Judging(1%)
You have distinctive preference of Introversion over Extraversion (67%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (25%)
You have marginal or no preference of Thinking over Feeling (1%)
You have marginal or no preference of Judging over Perceiving (1%)
PART 1/19 - Squatchhammer's Personality Report
Table of Contents
Click the 'Next' and 'Back' buttons below to see each part of your report
Part 1:
Contents
Part 2:
Personality Type
Part 3:
Big 5 Overview
Part 4:
Neuroticism
Part 5:
Extraversion
Part 6:
Openness
Part 7:
Agreeableness
Part 8:
Conscientiousness
Part 9-13:
Infographic
Part 14:
What to do Next
Part 15:
Compare to Friends
Part 16:
Share
Part 17-19:
Your Tests
How to read your report
Your report describes the strength of your feelings, thoughts and behaviors relative to other people of a similar age, gender and country. Two people may be classified as extraverts, but one will still be more extraverted than the other.
Scores are reported and graphed as percentile estimates, so a score of 65 means that you are estimated to be higher than 65% of people.
The blue Facebook Share button in the top right will share the current section you are on only, There are more sharing options on Part 16.
2/19 - Personality Type
Emotionally alanced
Emotionally [R]eactive
2%
98%
ntraverted
[E]xtraverted
91%
9%
[C]onventional
- pen
46%
54%
[G]uarded
[A]greeable
22%
78%
[D]isciplined
87%
13%
Your Personality Type is The Shaman (RIOAS)
Post by: Darvi on April 03, 2014, 03:06:32 am
Post by: Dutchling on April 05, 2014, 01:38:40 pm
Post by: Darvi on April 05, 2014, 02:13:43 pm
Erm... welp? :V
Post by: Tawa on April 05, 2014, 02:14:53 pm
What the heck?
Post by: Talvieno on April 05, 2014, 02:18:34 pm
Quote
Your privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 150No idea what that's supposed to mean.
Post by: Darvi on April 05, 2014, 02:19:44 pm
Post by: Mr Space Cat on April 05, 2014, 02:27:18 pm
Quote
Your privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 130
I knew I was a shitlord deep down inside.
also, I dislike the question on attractiveness. I'm not overweight, hopefully my face is not ugly, and I'm not disfigured, but I'm probably not 9/10 or have a particularly attractive face either. This quiz needs to check its privilege and stop discriminating against me by providing an answer that I believe applies to me. How insensitive of this quiz.
Post by: Tawa on April 05, 2014, 02:28:35 pm
How the heck is a blind person supposed to take an internet quiz, anyway?
Post by: TD1 on April 05, 2014, 02:34:12 pm
You have slight preference of Introversion over Extraversion (11%)
You have distinctive preference of Intuition over Sensing (62%)
You have slight preference of Feeling over Thinking (12%)
You have distinctive preference of Perceiving over Judging (67%)
INFP
Em, why does the title mention feet? Considering I only read the OP.
Post by: Dutchling on April 05, 2014, 02:41:02 pm
Em, why does the title mention feet? Considering I only read the OP.The thread changes quiz every now and then, when someone finds a new fun one.
Post by: TD1 on April 05, 2014, 02:43:20 pm
In that case, Roman apparently. Mixed with Egyptian.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 05, 2014, 03:27:35 pm
Same deal with the disability question.There are tools that will read webpages aloud, man.
How the heck is a blind person supposed to take an internet quiz, anyway?
Post by: Helgoland on April 05, 2014, 04:06:21 pm
Post by: Pnx on April 05, 2014, 04:11:22 pm
They seem to have a rather limited selection of dictators.
Post by: TD1 on April 05, 2014, 04:15:12 pm
And I was Mao Zedong.
Post by: Tarran on April 05, 2014, 04:25:19 pm
Post by: Dutchling on April 05, 2014, 04:35:19 pm
Which is strange since I answered no for the short and stumpy question.
Post by: Darvi on April 05, 2014, 04:43:57 pm
Post by: werty892 on April 05, 2014, 05:25:11 pm
83%
Saddam Hussein
67%
Benito Mussolini
67%
Mao Zedong
67%
Joseph Stalin
67%
Fidel Castro
33%
Adolf Hitler
33%
Fulgencio Batista
0%
K.
Post by: Talvieno on April 05, 2014, 06:06:40 pm
Post by: alexandertnt on April 05, 2014, 09:38:34 pm
Fulgencio Batista
67%
Mao Zedong
67%
Kim Jong il
50%
Saddam Hussein
33%
Benito Mussolini
33%
Fidel Castro
17%
Joseph Stalin
17%
Adolf Hitler
17%
Hell yeah, totally not Hitler.
Post by: Criptfeind on April 05, 2014, 09:42:49 pm
Fulgencio Batista
100%
Kim Jong il
100%
Benito Mussolini
100%
Saddam Hussein
100%
Fidel Castro
100%
Joseph Stalin
100%
Mao Zedong
100%
Adolf Hitler
100%
Post by: TD1 on April 05, 2014, 09:46:41 pm
Post by: Lagslayer on April 05, 2014, 10:41:43 pm
Dictators:
Benito Mussolini 50%
Saddam Hussein 33%
Fulgencio Batista 33%
Mao Zedong 33%
Joseph Stalin 33%
Kim Jong il 33%
Fidel Castro 0%
Adolf Hitler 0%
Post by: NobodyPro on April 05, 2014, 11:01:45 pm
33% Mao
33% Stalin
0% Others
At least I'm literally not-Hitler.
EDIT: Where's Pol Pot? "Do you think glasses make people more intelligent? ()()()"
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 05, 2014, 11:24:08 pm
Huh.
Post by: NAV on April 05, 2014, 11:25:25 pm
Huh. I guess I can never complain about anything ever again.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on April 05, 2014, 11:41:56 pm
Privilege: 190 SHITLORDWait, can we complain about not being able to complain ever again? Can we complain about being shitlords?
Huh. I guess I can never complain about anything ever again.
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 05, 2014, 11:45:00 pm
Hey, no recursing.Privilege: 190 SHITLORDWait, can we complain about not being able to complain ever again? Can we complain about being shitlords?
Huh. I guess I can never complain about anything ever again.
Post by: SquatchHammer on April 06, 2014, 01:55:22 am
Benito Mussolini 83%
Fidel Castro 83%
Mao Zedong 67%
Kim Jong il 67%
Fulgencio Batista 67%
Saddam Hussein 67%
Adolf Hitler 17%
Really? I'm not into socialism but very heavily into nuclear warfare. Like with this test, I would be nuking myself 67% of time during most of my runs in Civ 2. Ok, more like 367% of the time because when I get nukes, I like to make the world into a desert over a simple insult.
Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -155
Ok, I knew I was an ugly bastard, but COME ON!!
Post by: Eagle_eye on April 06, 2014, 11:48:23 pm
Your privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 125
You are a detached intellectual whose ideas will save/destroy the world. You are Einstein. You lead with your mind exploring the unknown and helping to invent the future of mankind. (http://similarminds.com/leader.html)
Post by: Arx on April 07, 2014, 12:16:56 am
Welp, knew this was coming as soon as I saw that the only African option was "Africa". I mean, I'm a cisgendered heterosexual not unattractive tall white person with no disabilities, and this is offset hugely by the fact that I'm in the middle income bracket and live on the same continent as a bunch of countries I don't bother learning the names of because they change every couple of years?
I have to shift my brain into tumblr gear to describe myself like that.
EDIT: took the quiz again to make sure I hadn't misclicked and described myself as blind or something, but still -235.
Post by: mastahcheese on April 07, 2014, 12:30:59 am
You Scored as Mao Zedong
Mao Zedong 83%
Benito Mussolini 67%
Fulgencio Batista 50%
Saddam Hussein 17%
Joseph Stalin 17%
Kim Jong il 0%
Fidel Castro 0%
Adolf Hitler 0%
That's interesting.
Post by: SquatchHammer on April 07, 2014, 01:27:29 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 07, 2014, 11:55:52 am
Aw fuck, I feel oppressed already.
You Scored as Benito Mussolini
Benito Mussolini 100%
Saddam Hussein 67%
Adolf Hitler 67%
Fidel Castro 67%
Mao Zedong 67%
Joseph Stalin 67%
Fulgencio Batista 50%
Kim Jong il 33%
God damn, and I don't even get any good dictators like Stalin or Hitler. This test sucks.
Post by: Jelle on April 07, 2014, 12:12:18 pm
Saddam Hussein 100%
Joseph Stalin 67%
Kim Jong il 50%
Benito Mussolini 33%
Fidel Castro 33%
Mao Zedong 33%
Adolf Hitler 33%
Fulgencio Batista 0%
...I'm ok with this!
Post by: DreamThorn on April 08, 2014, 02:44:06 am
Dictator test didn't make enough sense, so I skipped it.
iNT_ from personality MBTI test. Consistent with every other MBTI test I've ever done.
148 IQ balanced between left and right brain. Go me! 8)
Privilege level -Infinity or something. I bet they say that to anyone from Africa. I'm a white male South African, so I think this is inaccurate.
Post by: Vector on April 08, 2014, 02:54:54 am
Post by: Arx on April 08, 2014, 02:57:50 am
I'm a white male South African, so I think this is inaccurate.Also white African, also with minus infinity. I guess my rant was accurate, then.
Post by: Johuotar on April 08, 2014, 03:32:48 am
87% Fulgencio Batista. I don't even remember who he was anymore, quick googling and he's the Cuban pre revolution guy. Not very familiar with him.
Post by: Tiruin on April 08, 2014, 05:41:48 am
Mine is EXTREMELY OPPRESSED, score -275.Is this for a test on how Peasant-like you are in general? Where's the link for that?! D:
Post by: Knit tie on April 08, 2014, 06:51:29 am
My privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 160 (http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/quiz)Here you go.
Post by: Arx on April 08, 2014, 06:58:11 am
It's also your privilege level according to tumblr. Basically you should supposedly go out of your way to be nice to people who score below zero, and do the opposite for those who score above zero, because tumblr.Mine is EXTREMELY OPPRESSED, score -275.Is this for a test on how Peasant-like you are in general? Where's the link for that?! D:
Post by: Helgoland on April 08, 2014, 09:06:34 am
Damn, I'm Catholic, not Christian! :PMy privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 160 (http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/quiz)Here you go.
EDIT: Damn, -50! I don't want to know a mentally disabled African's score...
Post by: scrdest on April 08, 2014, 09:16:56 am
Damn, I'm Catholic, not Christian! :PMy privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 160 (http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/quiz)Here you go.
EDIT: Damn, -50! I don't want to know a mentally disabled African's score...
-999/-infinity. African seems to give it regardless of everything else.
Also, the questionnaire the poll was based on was actually made by, IIRC, 4chan.
Post by: Arx on April 08, 2014, 01:49:33 pm
EDIT: Damn, -50! I don't want to know a mentally disabled African's score...I took every negative option all at once (Yeah, I'm a homosexual bisexual asexual! Also I'm a mammal-bird-demon-dragon-were-reptile-otherkin!) and got -3270.
Also, answered nothing but country and entered Africa, and got -400.
Post by: Dutchling on April 08, 2014, 01:52:54 pm
/me represses gay internetpeople all over the world like the true king of the shitlords he is.
Post by: Tawa on April 08, 2014, 06:47:15 pm
-snip-
148 IQ balanced between left and right brain. Go me! 8)
-snip-
Hahaha. 156 over here.
MODIFY: Also, on the topic of the privilege quiz:
I'm wondering why you're expected to be able to take an internet quiz if you live in the idiot who wrote this's version of Africa, which apparently brings a negative 200 penalty. In fact, I don't see how you're supposed to have a computer without even positive results.
Post by: Darvi on April 08, 2014, 07:23:02 pm
Post by: alexandertnt on April 09, 2014, 01:33:07 am
Oh no I'm oppressed! Looks like you really can lean stuff about yourself from quizes.
Post by: DJ on April 09, 2014, 02:14:14 am
Post by: Darvi on April 09, 2014, 02:17:41 am
I am white male able-bodied genderqueer asexual nonreligious australian broke dragonkin and got -105 (Extremely Oppressed).So apparently being Australian dragonkin makes you less oppressed than an European with other kinship who otherwise gave the same results. Or maybe it's the income? I forgot what I gave there.
Oh no I'm oppressed! Looks like you really can lean stuff about yourself from quizes.
Post by: HFS on April 09, 2014, 02:28:08 am
Post by: Singularity125 on April 10, 2014, 02:16:15 pm
Quote
Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -145
Hm. Probably the random otherkin stuff that I'm unsure on. Ah well.
...the "Testimonials" page is pure gold :D
Post by: Putnam on April 11, 2014, 01:08:09 am
haha i didn't expect any different
Post by: misko27 on April 13, 2014, 10:49:45 am
Your privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 125Same here brother. I would be less privileged for my income level, but my tallness helps to oppress the ladies.
haha i didn't expect any different
Anyway, it came down to a tiebreaker involving Stalin, but instead I am the anti-Stalin in Batista. Mafia welcome, wipe your shoes on the poor people before you come in.
Post by: Iceblaster on April 13, 2014, 08:48:18 pm
Fulgencio Batista
100%
Joseph Stalin
100%
Benito Mussolini
83%
Mao Zedong
67%
Kim Jong il
33%
Fidel Castro
33%
Adolf Hitler
17%
Saddam Hussein
17%
Yeah.
EDIT: Where's the privelege test you guys are taking? I don't recall seeing a link :P
Post by: alexandertnt on April 13, 2014, 11:12:23 pm
EDIT: Where's the privelege test you guys are taking? I don't recall seeing a link :P
My privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 160 (http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/quiz)Here you go.
Post by: Elephant Parade on April 20, 2014, 09:05:50 pm
Did you know that you can select multiple options for all the questions, even when it makes no sense?
Edit: Aw, somebody already did this.
Post by: My Name is Immaterial on April 20, 2014, 09:20:02 pm
Quote
Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -135.
That's wierd. I'm an able-bodied white affluent male human from the U.S. with an other religious affiliation, and a disease (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_foot). It was fixed immediately after birth.
Post by: Knit tie on April 20, 2014, 09:28:21 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on April 20, 2014, 09:48:34 pm
Everybody else was 33% or less.
Your privilege level is SHITLORD with a score of 135
Post by: Empiricist on April 21, 2014, 02:42:17 am
Fulgencio Batista (63%) Everyone Else (0%)
Post by: scrdest on April 21, 2014, 04:58:40 am
So I really do wonder, what is it with Tumblr and these wierd privilege criteria?
It actually isn't tumblr, it was made to satirize tumblr.
Post by: SealyStar on April 21, 2014, 05:07:56 pm
*within a 2% margin of error
RE: The most recent topic (Tumblr Privilege™), I gave up counting a few times before sitting down and doing it. Something in the 200s range on the one I tried.
Post by: Elephant Parade on April 21, 2014, 05:44:30 pm
Everyone on the internet* (including me) is an INTJ. This is a Fact™.I'm supposedly an INTJ, but I've heard that most of those tests are terrible and tend to give flawed results. So I dunno.
*within a 2% margin of error
RE: The most recent topic (Tumblr Privilege™), I gave up counting a few times before sitting down and doing it. Something in the 200s range on the one I tried.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on April 21, 2014, 06:07:44 pm
I'm supposedly an INTJ, but I've heard that most of those tests are terrible and tend to give flawed results. So I dunno.
When in doubt, take multiple different tests to compare results. If still in doubt, take multiple tests multiple times. If still in doubt, stop taking tests.
Post by: TD1 on April 21, 2014, 06:18:40 pm
Post by: Knit tie on April 21, 2014, 06:34:49 pm
Post by: TD1 on April 21, 2014, 06:37:40 pm
Post by: Culise on April 21, 2014, 07:12:54 pm
Same deal with the disability question.Screen-readers are a beautiful thing. They can take text from a given input and output to speech synthesizers, audio cues, or Braille displays. Also, they really help you appreciate proper web design. The only thing more frustrating than trying to navigate some Flash-ridden menace to web standards everywhere is trying to navigate some Flash-ridden menace to web standards everywhere with a screen-reader, especially if they didn't hook proper ALT tags to the HTML images.
How the heck is a blind person supposed to take an internet quiz, anyway?
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 23, 2014, 01:41:20 am
Or, they could avoid a fate worse than Hell and ask a friend to read it for them.Same deal with the disability question.Screen-readers are a beautiful thing. They can take text from a given input and output to speech synthesizers, audio cues, or Braille displays. Also, they really help you appreciate proper web design. The only thing more frustrating than trying to navigate some Flash-ridden menace to web standards everywhere is trying to navigate some Flash-ridden menace to web standards everywhere with a screen-reader, especially if they didn't hook proper ALT tags to the HTML images.
How the heck is a blind person supposed to take an internet quiz, anyway?
Post by: mastahcheese on April 27, 2014, 11:11:46 pm
I ended up with Chaotic Good.
Spoiler: Chaotic Good (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xanmyral on April 27, 2014, 11:31:38 pm
Spoiler: Neutral (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordSlowpoke on April 27, 2014, 11:46:00 pm
Spoiler: chaotic evil (click to show/hide)
how unexpected
Post by: mastahcheese on April 27, 2014, 11:47:07 pm
Post by: Knit tie on April 27, 2014, 11:59:09 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 28, 2014, 12:01:54 am
Spoiler: Lawful Neutrals, Evils (Note the pronoun switch): (click to show/hide)
Post by: Criptfeind on April 28, 2014, 12:13:25 am
Post by: Mr Space Cat on April 28, 2014, 12:30:42 am
Spoiler: Neutral (click to show/hide)
In other news, neutral no longer seems like a word. In other other news, I am apparently a woman.
Post by: misko27 on April 28, 2014, 12:35:51 am
True Neutral.From the rule-surfing I've done, D&D applies she randomly.Spoiler: Neutral (click to show/hide)
In other news, neutral no longer seems like a word. In other other news, I am apparently a woman.
Post by: scrdest on April 28, 2014, 04:23:52 am
E: And a Human Sorcerer.
Post by: Arx on April 28, 2014, 04:37:14 am
Post by: Darvi on April 28, 2014, 04:51:27 am
Post by: Helgoland on April 28, 2014, 06:45:18 am
Post by: Knit tie on April 28, 2014, 07:11:07 am
Neutral good. A Knight in Sour Armor, apparently.That's one interpretation. Another one is "Good Guy Greg", and then we get into a whole plethora of potential personalities where helping people is more important than obeying or defying the laws. I believe Mahatma Ghandi was neutral good.
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on April 28, 2014, 07:14:50 am
Post by: Lagslayer on April 28, 2014, 08:18:40 am
A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government. The common phrase for lawful neutral is "true lawful." Lawful neutral is the best alignment you can be because it means you are reliable and honorable without being a zealot.
Post by: alexandertnt on April 28, 2014, 08:42:25 am
Quote
A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. The common phrase for neutral good is "true good." Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias toward or against order.
Yay, I'm the best!
Post by: sjm9876 on April 28, 2014, 11:24:33 am
Post by: TD1 on April 28, 2014, 11:46:36 am
Post by: Iceblaster on April 28, 2014, 11:47:57 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So yeah. Lawful Good.
Yay.
I'm a tree hugging hippie!
Post by: Singularity125 on April 28, 2014, 11:57:18 am
Neutral GoodQuoteA neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. The common phrase for neutral good is "true good." Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias toward or against order.
Yay, I'm the best!
If you haven't noticed, all the alignment blurbs have a clause about being the "best alignment". Everyone gets to be a special snowflake :P
Not surprisingly, I also ended up with Neutral Good.
Post by: scrdest on April 28, 2014, 12:00:03 pm
Neutral GoodQuoteA neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them. The common phrase for neutral good is "true good." Neutral good is the best alignment you can be because it means doing what is good without bias toward or against order.
Yay, I'm the best!
If you haven't noticed, all the alignment blurbs have a clause about being the "best alignment". Everyone gets to be a special snowflake :P
Not surprisingly, I also ended up with Neutral Good.
Even the evil ones?
Also, I'm somewhat surprised by the sheer number of non-Good results.
Post by: Cecilff2 on April 30, 2014, 02:33:11 pm
Nearly tied with Chaotic Good.
Post by: kaijyuu on April 30, 2014, 05:57:06 pm
Down with authority!
Personal integrity is great!
All forms of collected power are probably evil!
Post by: misko27 on April 30, 2014, 09:06:39 pm
First, the bias towards non-good is probably because of the forum. The Upper Boards would be hilariously skewed. Second, the Easydamus site has a notable word change where evil alignments merely "consider" their alignment to be the best. Example:If you haven't noticed, all the alignment blurbs have a clause about being the "best alignment". Everyone gets to be a special snowflake :PEven the evil ones?
Not surprisingly, I also ended up with Neutral Good.
Also, I'm somewhat surprised by the sheer number of non-Good results.
Quote
Lawful evil creatures consider their alignment to be the best because it combines honor with a dedicated self-interest.They also get a sentence about how they are the most dangerous:
Quote
Lawful evil is the most dangerous alignment because it represents methodical, intentional, and frequently successful evil.Also, I ran myself through the character creator and came out a Lawful Neutral wizard. Hmm, last time I took the test I was a Lawful Evil sorcerer (the sorcerer part at least I might prefer). Both times I scored notably high as a cleric though. Interesting. Trying to reconcile the alignments, I'm a Lawful Neutral who believes in a government designed by Lawful Good (with a edit to compensate for LG naivety, of course) who personally is very self-centered. I help the government help others help me.
...That should be on a bumper-sticker. A DC bumper sticker.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 30, 2014, 10:11:54 pm
Post by: DeKaFu on April 30, 2014, 10:57:10 pm
Weird.
Post by: Elephant Parade on April 30, 2014, 11:04:35 pm
Spoiler: Lawful Good (click to show/hide)
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 02, 2014, 04:48:58 am
Post by: darkpaladin109 on May 02, 2014, 05:18:36 am
Post by: Tawa on May 02, 2014, 12:07:35 pm
*guitar riff*
Spoiler: Chaotic Neutral (click to show/hide)
Someone drag my D&D group over here. With the exception of you, Cromwell.
Post by: TD1 on May 02, 2014, 12:26:07 pm
Post by: sjm9876 on May 02, 2014, 01:57:29 pm
Which is the exact character I finished Neverwinter Nights with. heh. No real surprises.
Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
Post by: Mr Space Cat on May 02, 2014, 10:56:50 pm
Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
Got a lawful neutral dwarf ranger bard, follower of Silvanus. Huh. Ok, I can roll with that.
Post by: Lagslayer on May 02, 2014, 11:16:06 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: alexandertnt on May 02, 2014, 11:17:48 pm
Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
A Lawful Good Gnome Bard (and part time Thief), apparently.
Spoiler: I worship Garl Glittergold (click to show/hide)
Post by: NobodyPro on May 02, 2014, 11:29:23 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on May 02, 2014, 11:40:53 pm
Other than being an elf, that's pretty much what I expected.
Post by: Ddynamo on May 02, 2014, 11:57:54 pm
•You have moderate preference of Sensing over Intuition (50%)
•You have distinct preference of Thinking over Feeling (62%)
•You have slight preference of Perceiving over Judging (22%)
Post by: Mr Space Cat on May 03, 2014, 12:01:13 am
I recommend this (http://easydamus.com/alignmenttest.html) site. It has the same quiz, but with a breakdown, and a lot more information of the alignments themselves. It also has this (http://easydamus.com/character.html), which makes a character based on your answers.Took Misko's character quiz for fun. Got a true neutral human sorcerer.
Spoiler: true neutral human sorcerer (click to show/hide)
Probably got a spellcaster due to my lack of athleticism and preference for academics/intellectual stuff over sports. I'm a scrawny unfit nerd. Sorcerers' manipulation of spells with "imagination and talent rather than studious discipline" fits. I don't study too much, I just learn quickly and I tend to hear I have "natural talent." Don't agree with the bit about sorcerer's need for charisma, though. My charisma is rubbish irl. I'd be the most socially autistic sorcerer.
Post by: mastahcheese on May 03, 2014, 12:03:45 am
You couldn't even cast a magic missile spell.
Post by: mastahcheese on May 03, 2014, 12:29:24 am
I just took that test myself.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
First time I'm not chaotic good, and my wisdom is so bad I couldn't cast even the simplest spell.
In short, I suck.
But I liked the test, that's cool.
Post by: Lucid Blue on May 03, 2014, 12:55:40 am
•You have strong preference of Introversion over Extraversion (100%)
•You have strong preference of Intuition over Sensing (92%)
•You have a distinct preference of Thinking over Feeling (64%)
•You have strong preference of Judging over Perceiving (80%)
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 03, 2014, 01:46:32 am
Wait, what? Bards can't be Lawful.Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
A Lawful Good Gnome Bard (and part time Thief), apparently.Spoiler: I worship Garl Glittergold (click to show/hide)
Post by: alexandertnt on May 03, 2014, 07:22:30 am
All the answers for the "Family elders are expressing disapproval" one are either "blindly accept what they say", "blindly accept what they say and compromise", "blindly deny what they say and hurt them" or just straight up "hurt them".
For the " If your family had arranged your marriage to someone loathsome, would you?" question there is no simple "refuse" option, I am either accepting that I have no choice, running away, or hurting people again.
I am a badass rebel bard 8).Wait, what? Bards can't be Lawful.Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
A Lawful Good Gnome Bard (and part time Thief), apparently.Spoiler: I worship Garl Glittergold (click to show/hide)
Post by: scrdest on May 03, 2014, 07:39:06 am
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on May 03, 2014, 08:32:58 am
Lol
Post by: Lagslayer on May 03, 2014, 09:05:51 am
Spoiler: big test (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mr Space Cat on May 03, 2014, 09:33:17 am
As a sorcerer with a CHA of 10, you'd never get farther than casting cantrips, if you followed the rules.Oh wow. That's hilarious.
You couldn't even cast a magic missile spell.
Guess I'll go back to thinking I'm a lawful neutral dwarf ranger bard now. Ignorance is bliss.
Post by: Trapezohedron on May 03, 2014, 09:40:18 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hmm.
Post by: Tiruin on May 03, 2014, 11:24:30 am
Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.Mhmm.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Iceblaster on May 03, 2014, 11:45:35 am
Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Interesting test.
Post by: Eagle_eye on May 03, 2014, 04:06:27 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SealyStar on May 03, 2014, 04:59:47 pm
Spoiler: DnD thing (click to show/hide)
Post by: darkpaladin109 on May 03, 2014, 05:04:47 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 03, 2014, 07:46:21 pm
Rebelling by accepting authority! I like it!I am a badass rebel bard 8).Wait, what? Bards can't be Lawful.Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
A Lawful Good Gnome Bard (and part time Thief), apparently.Spoiler: I worship Garl Glittergold (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on May 03, 2014, 10:31:22 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Remuthra on May 03, 2014, 10:44:08 pm
Spoiler: Classy Evil is the best Evil. (click to show/hide)
Post by: alexandertnt on May 04, 2014, 03:11:43 am
Well, the marriage part, that's pretty much all the options you would have. Go with it or GTFO.
Or just refuse to go through with it.
Post by: scrdest on May 04, 2014, 04:36:56 am
Well, the marriage part, that's pretty much all the options you would have. Go with it or GTFO.
Or just refuse to go through with it.
You didn't really have that option. You'd either be coerced into it or just thrown out, so the sum total would be the same as running.
Post by: sjm9876 on May 04, 2014, 06:58:54 am
From a personality standpoint though, they are rather different things. But ah well. As it seems to be asking about lawful/chaotic, run is probably treated the same as refusal.Well, the marriage part, that's pretty much all the options you would have. Go with it or GTFO.
Or just refuse to go through with it.
You didn't really have that option. You'd either be coerced into it or just thrown out, so the sum total would be the same as running.
Post by: alexandertnt on May 04, 2014, 10:10:21 am
Well, the marriage part, that's pretty much all the options you would have. Go with it or GTFO.
Or just refuse to go through with it.
You didn't really have that option. You'd either be coerced into it or just thrown out, so the sum total would be the same as running.
That highly depends on the hypothetical fantastical society, doesn't it?
I based my response on what I would do in the real world. In the real world I could refuse and both the law and society at large would be on my side.
If I don't have that option, then the question is assuming something about the society it's not telling me (since why can't a fantasy society have similar laws, or why can't a fantasy society shun forced marrage in general (running would not really be necessary when your society is supporting you)).
[/overthinkingquestion]
Post by: scrdest on May 04, 2014, 10:23:18 am
Post by: MonkeyHead on May 04, 2014, 12:28:17 pm
Used this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.
As have I, to find I am a Lawful Evil Dwarf Fighter Mage.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Remuthra on May 04, 2014, 12:30:24 pm
Post by: TD1 on May 04, 2014, 01:39:02 pm
We Lawful Evil Fighter Magi must band together to rule the world.As a lawful neutral wizard, I must object.
And yet be compelled at the same time...
Post by: MaximumZero on May 04, 2014, 09:39:57 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: mastahcheese on May 04, 2014, 09:46:28 pm
I'm either True Neutral or Chaotic Good, so I guess I'll just be sabotaging you guys later on.We Lawful Evil Fighter Magi must band together to rule the world.As a lawful neutral wizard, I must object.
And yet be compelled at the same time...
Cheers.
Post by: misko27 on May 04, 2014, 10:15:12 pm
Hey woah can I get in on this? Not a fighter, but a Wizard/cleric is useful!We Lawful Evil Fighter Magi must band together to rule the world.As a lawful neutral wizard, I must object.
And yet be compelled at the same time...
My resume:
Suddenly I wish to play D&D.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nice of you to tell us beforehand so we can prepare.I'm either True Neutral or Chaotic Good, so I guess I'll just be sabotaging you guys later on.We Lawful Evil Fighter Magi must band together to rule the world.As a lawful neutral wizard, I must object.
And yet be compelled at the same time...
Cheers.
Post by: mastahcheese on May 04, 2014, 10:28:47 pm
Nice of you to tell us beforehand so we can prepare.Just trying to be good to you guys, you know?
Post by: Lagslayer on May 04, 2014, 10:36:08 pm
*facepalm* (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StupidGood)Nice of you to tell us beforehand so we can prepare.Just trying to be good to you guys, you know?
Post by: Vector on May 04, 2014, 10:45:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
oh come on ._.
Post by: mastahcheese on May 04, 2014, 10:46:57 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 04, 2014, 10:53:48 pm
Post by: Vector on May 05, 2014, 04:45:19 am
Try to cut off your hand, you might be a living saint.
BRB
Post by: TD1 on May 05, 2014, 09:18:37 am
Did Tiruin take over your account?
Post by: Remuthra on May 05, 2014, 02:00:07 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on May 05, 2014, 04:46:24 pm
That...is almost as good as you're gonna get :/I think Tiru got Neutral Good, actually.
Did Tiruin take over your account?
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 05, 2014, 05:05:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on May 05, 2014, 05:16:26 pm
However, what makes a man neutral? Maybe it's lust for power or greed, or perhaps they're simply born with a heart full of neutrality...
Post by: mastahcheese on May 05, 2014, 05:18:36 pm
I'd think that most people would fall under true neutral, honestly.
But the thing is, I like laws, too. But for some reason, overall I ended up as Chaotic.
Not sure what to make of that.
Post by: Graknorke on May 05, 2014, 05:19:21 pm
Mostly sounds about right. If there's one thing I can't stand it's people who break agreements.
Post by: misko27 on May 05, 2014, 06:55:26 pm
True Neutral is what most humans are. Pretty basic: Don't necessarily follow laws, but see the value in them (or, follow laws because it is in their interest to do so); respond to the kind with kindness and malefactors with malevolence; follows self-interest without hurting others.
Post by: Vector on May 05, 2014, 07:08:28 pm
That...is almost as good as you're gonna get :/
Did Tiruin take over your account?
Nope (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsNotNice).
Post by: Tiruin on May 05, 2014, 11:58:14 pm
Depending on what sense of good you follow ;DThat...is almost as good as you're gonna get :/
Did Tiruin take over your account?
Nope (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsNotNice).
Also nup. I do not take over accounts xD
But to poke at that one note there~
I think I messed up the counter. :vUsed this (http://neppyman.sytes.net/dndwho/) test.Mhmm.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Graknorke on May 06, 2014, 03:32:17 pm
Again, this site (http://easydamus.com/trueneutral.html) has the breakdown on what the alignments mean in general, the philosophies, their views on others, governments based on them, what it means to be a adventurer of that alignment, et cetera.No sorry that website does actually put my ideals into lawful neutral.
True Neutral is what most humans are. Pretty basic: Don't necessarily follow laws, but see the value in them (or, follow laws because it is in their interest to do so); respond to the kind with kindness and malefactors with malevolence; follows self-interest without hurting others.
Quote
the ultimate harmony of the world--and the whole universe--is considered by lawful neutral creatures to have its sole hope rest upon law and order.
Lawful neutral beings believe in a strong, well-ordered government, whether that government is a tyranny or benevolent democracy.
Rebellion is a crime regardless of the purpose behind revolt.
Lawful neutral beings are concerned with the letter of the law, but rarely the spirit.
the well-being of the group put ahead of the individual on almost every occasion.
Such persons see good and evil as immaterial and unimportant in the structuring of the universe
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 06, 2014, 05:40:57 pm
Your Result: Barrett M82A1
62%
You're the M82A1, the US army's new gold-standard in sniper weaponry. You can hit targets from up to 2.5 miles away, fire multiple shots before reloading, and just be all-around bad ass (http://www.gotoquiz.com/results/what_kind_of_weapon_are_you)
Thank god it wasn't anywhere near the katana.
Post by: Graknorke on May 06, 2014, 06:31:13 pm
Thank god it wasn't anywhere near the katana.I got to be mercer.
FFS I don't want to be ostracised.
Post by: RedKing on May 06, 2014, 07:13:06 pm
Post by: SealyStar on May 06, 2014, 07:15:21 pm
Post by: Tawa on May 06, 2014, 07:34:40 pm
We should make a band, guys!
EDIT: The weapon quiz won't load for some reason.
EDIT2: Apparently I'm one of the leftest, most liberal people in the world.
Wooo, I should pick up LCS.
Post by: Eric Blank on May 06, 2014, 07:50:52 pm
Ima become one with mah sword arm!
Post by: Remuthra on May 06, 2014, 07:59:25 pm
Post by: Mr Space Cat on May 06, 2014, 08:54:46 pm
Runners up: 53% Alex Mercer, 26% long bow, 14% crossbow.
I was the katana. I'll just go commit seppuku now.I'll be your dude that cleans your guts up if you'll be the dude to clean my guts up. We can even share the katana.
Post by: uber pye on May 07, 2014, 12:57:57 am
76% katana
68% crossbow
for dnd quiz
Neutral good human wizard
(weird I'm playing that in a game)
Strength- 12
Dexterity- 15
Constitution- 15
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 15
Charisma- 12
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 07, 2014, 03:06:06 am
Also 40% Barrett M82A1, 26% Long Bow, and 14% Katana. Bollocks, the friggin' katana.
Post by: Kedly on May 07, 2014, 04:00:07 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well shit. I knew I was going to end up elf, but I was at least hoping to be a mage >.>
Post by: Arx on May 07, 2014, 04:09:53 am
I am surprised by druid, but not much else.
Post by: alexandertnt on May 07, 2014, 05:43:26 am
You're a katana, a traditional Japanese weapon. You're better at slashing than at stabbing, but you're quick, sharp, and light. You come in 3 variations: The dagger-like Tanto, the mid-sized Wazikashi, and the long-reaching Katana.
40% Crossbow
14% Long Bow
14% Claymore
14% Barrett M82A1
0% Alex Mercer
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on May 07, 2014, 07:34:03 am
Post by: Xanmyral on May 07, 2014, 09:24:38 am
Post by: Haspen on May 07, 2014, 09:29:08 am
Your Result: Claymore
You're a claymore, a traditional Scottish weapon. You are best used while on horseback, due to your length (Don't Go There). Your heavy weight can smash through almost anything.
Result Breakdown:
79% Claymore
40% Katana
26% Long Bow
26% Barrett M82A1
0% Crossbow
0% Alex Mercer
HASPEN SMASH V:<
Post by: TD1 on May 07, 2014, 09:34:17 am
Your Result: Long Bow
76%
You're a long bow, a heavy, hard-hitting, iconic weapon. It takes strength to wield, but even more to wield CORRECTLY. In old armies, there would be many rows of archers to thin out the enemy from afar.
62%Katana
30%Claymore
30%Alex Mercer
0%Barrett M82A1
0%Crossbow
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on May 07, 2014, 09:36:12 am
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (44%)
You have moderate preference of Sensing over Intuition (25%)
You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (38%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (33%)
Good to know.
I'm 76% crossbow by the way.
30% longbow
30% Katana
30% Barret M82A1
16% Claymore
16% Alex Mercer
Post by: Trapezohedron on May 07, 2014, 09:37:00 am
You are Alex Mercer, codenamed ZEUS. Because of the BLACKLIGHT virus within you, you can shape-shift your body into claws, hammer-like fists, whips, shields, armor, and a giant blade. You can also take the form of others.
40% Barrett M82A1
26% Long Bow
14% Katana
0% Claymore
0% Crossbow
Bullshit.
Post by: Lagslayer on May 07, 2014, 10:35:12 am
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on May 07, 2014, 03:20:17 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 07, 2014, 03:24:01 pm
93% katanaTHE LEMONPIE HAS ASCENDED
THE LEMONPIE HAS BECOME GORRILION FOLDS INCARNATE
ALL WILL COMMMIT SUDOKU AGAINST SUPERIOR EDGES OF LEMONPIE
Post by: misko27 on May 07, 2014, 04:00:08 pm
ON IT! (http://www.websudoku.com/)93% katanaTHE LEMONPIE HAS ASCENDED
THE LEMONPIE HAS BECOME GORRILION FOLDS INCARNATE
ALL WILL COMMMIT SUDOKU AGAINST SUPERIOR EDGES OF LEMONPIE
Post by: scrdest on May 07, 2014, 04:09:25 pm
ON IT! (http://www.websudoku.com/)93% katanaTHE LEMONPIE HAS ASCENDED
THE LEMONPIE HAS BECOME GORRILION FOLDS INCARNATE
ALL WILL COMMMIT SUDOKU AGAINST SUPERIOR EDGES OF LEMONPIE
You never heard that... joke, I guess? before?
Post by: Jelle on May 07, 2014, 05:32:55 pm
Alignment: True Neutral characters are very rare. They believe that balance is the most important thing, and will not side with any other force. They will do whatever is necessary to preserve that balance, even if it means switching allegiances suddenly.
Race: Half-Orcs are a cross between a human and an orc. Generally, this kind of mating does not occur willingly, so half-orcs are almost never raised by a full set of parents. They tend to be less intelligent and attractive than humans, but are generally stronger and hardier. Violence is a part of their nature, and few half-orcs manage to overcome this to follow other professions. They are generally treated with disdain by other races, if not outright hostility.
Primary Class: Druids are a special variety of Cleric who serves the Earth, and can call upon the power in the earth to accomplish their goals. They tend to be somewhat fanatical about defending natural settings.
Secondary Class: Rangers are the defenders of nature and the elements. They are in tune with the Earth, and work to keep it safe and healthy.
Deity: Silvanus is the True Neutral god of nature. He is also known as the Patron of Druids. His followers believe in the perfect balance of nature, and believe that nature's bounty is preferable to any other 'civilizing' method. They wear leather or metallic scale mail, constructed of leaf-shaped scales. Silvanus's symbol is an oak leaf.
Detailed Results:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Sooo apparently I'm all about nature and stuff?
Post by: tompliss on May 08, 2014, 03:17:42 am
True Neutral Half-Orc Druid RangerA violent hippie ? ._.
Post by: Lagslayer on May 08, 2014, 11:07:14 am
PETATrue Neutral Half-Orc Druid RangerA violent hippie ? ._.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 09, 2014, 01:57:57 am
His Intelligence score is too high.PETATrue Neutral Half-Orc Druid RangerA violent hippie ? ._.
Post by: Xanmyral on May 09, 2014, 02:26:45 am
Spoiler: Character Details (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Detailed Results (click to show/hide)
Kinda boring results, but oh well.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 09, 2014, 05:56:22 pm
Oh snap! PETA are people too right...?His Intelligence score is too high.PETATrue Neutral Half-Orc Druid RangerA violent hippie ? ._.
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on June 04, 2014, 09:38:57 am
Kinda late but im sigging this.93% katanaTHE LEMONPIE HAS ASCENDED
THE LEMONPIE HAS BECOME GORRILION FOLDS INCARNATE
ALL WILL COMMMIT SUDOKU AGAINST SUPERIOR EDGES OF LEMONPIE
Post by: gigaraptor487 on June 04, 2014, 11:21:13 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hops on June 07, 2014, 08:46:47 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
...
I guess I would love getting bent when people use me~
DnD test
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
WHY IS EVERYONE A BARD
Post by: Darvi on June 07, 2014, 10:16:31 am
Your Result: Katana 93%
You're a katana, a traditional Japanese weapon. You're better at slashing than at stabbing, but you're quick, sharp, and light. You come in 3 variations: The dagger-like Tanto, the mid-sized Wazikashi, and the long-reaching Katana.
53% Alex Mercer
14% Crossbow
14% Long Bow
0% Barrett M82A1
0% Claymore
Really? Really? That's exactly the opposite of what I was hoping for.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on June 07, 2014, 10:34:46 am
how do you feel about this situation
Post by: Darvi on June 07, 2014, 11:02:45 am
Post by: Graknorke on June 08, 2014, 06:36:17 pm
WHY IS EVERYONE A BARD(http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130227171250/finalfantasy/images/9/93/Spoony_Bard_-_TAY.png)
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on June 08, 2014, 08:34:33 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on June 15, 2014, 04:22:17 pm
http://www.davidmarkley.com/personality/infp.htm
For those not quite sure what their personality thingy meant.
Post by: MorleyDev on June 15, 2014, 04:48:59 pm
You have marginal or no preference of Extraversion over Introversion (1%)
You have distinct preference of Intuition over Sensing (75%)
You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (50%)
You have slight preference of Perceiving over Judging (11%)
Marginal or no preference. Well never mind xD
Though apparently a "possible career for ENTP" is Computer Programmer. Well that's good to know, since...ya know. That's what I've been aiming for over the last 8 years of my life since I started programming at ~14 xD
Post by: Descan on June 15, 2014, 04:54:10 pm
I only got strong margins on the first two, and even then they're only... Marginal. Hm.
But yeah, the descriptors seem to make sense. Sense of wonder, check. Love of systems and discovery, check. Languages and science, yep. Impending sense of doom from possibly missing some key data and fucking up on analysis, yeeeecheck. Knowledge for knowledge sake, yep. Amenable to anything and everything until you FUCK UP, yep. [violated principles from YOU FUCKING UP] Precision to the point of being an anal twerp, justaskmymum yep. Sense of grandeur of the world and of Mankind, yep.
Even the whole "Imaginary world" thing fits, mostly in my youth but I do enjoy some fantasizing now and then.
Post by: Vector on June 15, 2014, 04:58:06 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on June 15, 2014, 05:00:07 pm
Quote
INTP
Introvert(44%) iNtuitive(75%) Thinking(12%) Perceiving(44%)
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (44%)
You have distinct preference of Intuition over Sensing (75%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (12%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (44%)
Though to be honest, I was unsure on several of the questions.
@Vector: Indeed. As far as current science goes, there are as many personality types as there are people, and it's impossible to fit everyone into distinct categories of any system.
Post by: TD1 on June 15, 2014, 05:03:59 pm
Post by: scrdest on June 15, 2014, 05:08:14 pm
Or, say, a question that measures how are you on the judging/perceiving axis that happens to ask about something you happen to be VERY concerned about, biasing the results towards J.
Also, I think that every person expresses all sixteen combinations in particular situations, and as such the personality type is not a measure of 'what type you are', but more your most likely/frequent personality type.
As for me, upon reading the summaries and remembering the past results, I'm a mostly standard ENTP, with the first and the last being slightly on the fence in tests.
Post by: Greiger on June 15, 2014, 05:09:03 pm
I've taken the test before but don't recall what I got back then, I know I was high on the Introverted scale back then as well. I don't mind socializing with people online when I'm physically alone, but I hate being near other people. I'm usually ok with my small circle of friends but even with them I get to the point eventually where I really want to be alone.
No idea what a 1% On that S means. Does that mean I don't do either? Or maybe I screwed it up and it has no idea?
I'm also not so sure about that T there. Sometimes I want to think things out before committing, other times I just want to get it over with and go with my gut, I figure that should probably be a lower percentage.
Not sure what the perceiving over judging is even supposed to mean.
Funnily enough I clicked on the career choices thing and the first thing that came up is computer science and software engineering. Well whaddaya know that's more or less what I just got a degree in.
Post by: Glloyd on June 15, 2014, 05:09:57 pm
Introvert(11%) iNtuitive(38%) Thinking(38%) Perceiving(11%)
You have slight preference of Introversion over Extraversion (11%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
You have moderate preference of Thinking over Feeling (38%)
You have slight preference of Perceiving over Judging (11%)
It's all pretty slight preference though. I prefer to think of myself as an introverted extrovert, because while I do prefer to be alone, I don't have any troubles interacting with larger groups of people, and I'm very energetic and enthusiastic when in situations like that. I would just much rather be alone, or with a small group of people (1-3).
The rest seems more like me, especially reading the analysis. I have trouble making decisions, but I'm also pretty relaxed about how those decisions end up.
To quote:
Quote
The open-endedness (from Perceiving) conjoined with the need for competence (NT) is expressed in a sense that one's conclusion may well be met by an equally plausible alternative solution, and that, after all, one may very well have overlooked some critical bit of data.
Which is how I am, to a degree. However, I'm less inclined towards math than the analysis says is average. The games part applies, except that word games bore the hell out of me, but I love all things strategy. The rules thing doesn't really apply for me though, I HATE following rules, and doing things by the books. However, that may just be the ADHD part of me :P
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 15, 2014, 05:11:18 pm
No idea what a 1% On that S means. Does that mean I don't do either?A low score in a letter means you encompass traits of both letters and do not have a strong preference of one over the other. As such, your result would be better shown as IXTP.
Post by: Remuthra on June 15, 2014, 05:11:33 pm
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (44%)
You have distinct preference of Intuition over Sensing (62%)
You have strong preference of Thinking over Feeling (100%)
You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (11%)
Well that's certainly a thing.
Post by: Vector on June 15, 2014, 05:12:37 pm
Post by: MorleyDev on June 15, 2014, 05:13:07 pm
Personally, I always had trouble identifying as an INTJ because I don't feel especially competent. I realize that I apparently radiate competence and authority, but I very much don't feel that way; I'm easily intimidated by most authority figures. The systems I enjoy building are theoretical more than practical, I fantasize rather a lot, and I typically find real-world application boring. Ah well. The particulars may not be accurate, but the shoe fits.
I doubt there are that many competent people in the world who actually feel competent. And there are many utterly incompetent people who are completely convinced of their own competence. One of the things about truly being competent is that it requires you to know how much better you could be, which makes you feel less competent because there's always something else you could do better.
Especially since everybody is comparing the inside of their head to the outside of the people they see, and inside a persons head is a scary place to be in comparison. I know, I'm in one right now :) There's a reason that a lot of the people who you'd think of as being calm and controlled will often suffer from a lot of stress-related illnesses.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 15, 2014, 05:18:11 pm
For example, you may find yourself cowed by authority figures, but I doubt you'd let them get away with stating blatantly false mathematical principles or claiming that Russian poetry is always terrible.
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 15, 2014, 05:23:46 pm
Post by: Vector on June 15, 2014, 05:26:48 pm
Post by: TD1 on June 15, 2014, 05:28:09 pm
Just read up on INFP.
Yep.
It's eerily accurate, too.
Still, they don't explain a lot of things about me. It's just that the little parts they explain are really accurate.
It suits me down to the ground. Even the bit about getting riled up about a cause.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 15, 2014, 05:34:24 pm
Oh, is that how that works.Indeed, and while it has probably happened at least by chance to you at some point, if it hasn't you should give shifting Extroverted Thinking to socialization a shot. It's pretty hard to do intentionally or unintentionally, but it's an amazing feeling when it does happen. If you've ever had a time in which everybody seemed to fall in line and obey you while you expressed simple certainty of something, that's that.
Quote
And yes, you're absolutely correct on the latter point.Indeed there are. I've gotten "you can just let people be wrong [MSH], why do you have to cause so much trouble" more than once. Earlier in my life those comments made me anxious, but now they just make me angry.
there are people who actually don't do that, aren't there ._.
Post by: SalmonGod on June 15, 2014, 05:36:01 pm
J thinks things out, P makes snap decisions. 1% S means that you tend slightly more towards experiencing sensation, rather than sitting in your head and thinking about stuff that's not going on right now.
Really?... it's been a few years since I read deep into this stuff, but this is the opposite of what I remember. What I recall is that J is a preference for decision-making over information-gathering, and P is the opposite. Someone who is 100% P will just gather information and categorize hypotheticals forever, and never make a real decision until forced... like me.
The T/F split is about using cognitive vs. emotional decision-making processes.
I've seen this one described as subjective vs objective style thinking, and that made a lot of sense to me.
Post by: Parsely on June 15, 2014, 05:39:15 pm
You have moderate preference of Extraversion over Introversion (28%)
You have slight preference of Intuition over Sensing (12%)
You have marginal or no preference of Thinking over Feeling (1%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (28%)
Post by: Remuthra on June 15, 2014, 05:40:05 pm
Yep, at a certain point you can be certain enough that something is so that it suddenly becomes that way. I wrote a bit of a paper on the effect a while ago.Oh, is that how that works.Indeed, and while it has probably happened at least by chance to you at some point, if it hasn't you should give shifting Extroverted Thinking to socialization a shot. It's pretty hard to do intentionally or unintentionally, but it's an amazing feeling when it does happen. If you've ever had a time in which everybody seemed to fall in line and obey you while you expressed simple certainty of something, that's that.
Post by: MorleyDev on June 15, 2014, 05:40:42 pm
I've gotten "you can just let people be wrong [MSH], why do you have to cause so much trouble" more than once
I usually go the Socratic route. If I spot something I think is a mistake, I try and phrase pointing it out in the form of a question. Experience taught me that people take less offence to being asked a question and led to explaining their thinking. Also if their thinking is correct and I, not being perfect, didn't consider something then I learn. If not, odds are good they'll realise the mistake as they answer the question. Either way, some kind of progress is made.
Post by: scrdest on June 15, 2014, 05:41:26 pm
Yep, at a certain point you can be certain enough that something is so that it suddenly becomes that way. I wrote a bit of a paper on the effect a while ago.Oh, is that how that works.Indeed, and while it has probably happened at least by chance to you at some point, if it hasn't you should give shifting Extroverted Thinking to socialization a shot. It's pretty hard to do intentionally or unintentionally, but it's an amazing feeling when it does happen. If you've ever had a time in which everybody seemed to fall in line and obey you while you expressed simple certainty of something, that's that.
Oh? What field you are on, Psych?
Post by: SalmonGod on June 15, 2014, 05:42:07 pm
I'm INTP! The description thingy is 50% spot on and 50% kind of similar to how I act. I feel like those things are written vaguely and broadly like horoscopes, anyway.
The thing I like about Myers-Briggs is that it's NOT like that. It measures you on 4 very clear dichotomies and builds profiles that are very different from each other. The two that I match up with as an INXP describe me really well, while none of the others do at all. Of course, you may not match up so well if you're not strongly expressed on any of those 4 dichotomies, but that's a good thing. It recognizes that people aren't binary, and rates you on a gradient. There just aren't profiles written up for people at various gradient levels. It shows you what the descriptors mean in an absolute sense and it's kind of up to you to figure out how you relate to that absolute based on where you place on the gradient scale.
Post by: MeimieFan88 on June 15, 2014, 05:44:09 pm
You have distinct preference of Introversion over Extraversion (67%)
You have slight preference of Sensing over Intuition (12%)
You have moderate preference of Feeling over Thinking (50%)
You have strong preference of Perceiving over Judging (78%)
I usually get INFP, but I guess the preference is slight either way. After reading about the difference, I think I might be more S than N.
Post by: Remuthra on June 15, 2014, 05:46:25 pm
It was just a general theoretical look at the nature of leadership, for some sort of society or something, if I remember. I don't know that I have a copy on it anymore, but it was related to the nature of the cliche and the processes of stigmatization and reformation associated with changing a group dynamic.Yep, at a certain point you can be certain enough that something is so that it suddenly becomes that way. I wrote a bit of a paper on the effect a while ago.Oh, is that how that works.Indeed, and while it has probably happened at least by chance to you at some point, if it hasn't you should give shifting Extroverted Thinking to socialization a shot. It's pretty hard to do intentionally or unintentionally, but it's an amazing feeling when it does happen. If you've ever had a time in which everybody seemed to fall in line and obey you while you expressed simple certainty of something, that's that.
Oh? What field you are on, Psych?
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 15, 2014, 05:49:09 pm
The thing I like about Myers-Briggs is that it's NOT like that. It measures you on 4 very clear dichotomies and builds profiles that are very different from each other. The two that I match up with as an INXP describe me really well, while none of the others do at all. Of course, you may not match up so well if you're not strongly expressed on any of those 4 dichotomies, but that's a good thing. It recognizes that people aren't binary, and rates you on a gradient. There just aren't profiles written up for people at various gradient levels. It shows you what the descriptors mean in an absolute sense and it's kind of up to you to figure out how you relate to that absolute based on where you place on the gradient scale.
Yeah, I guess if I read it as a description of the absolute INTP then a lot of differences make more sense. The description I found still feels a bit too horoscopey even when viewed like that.
I'm like 60% I, 50% N, 60% T, and 20% P. I used to be ~100% I and ~0% P/J. A lot can change in like five years, I guess.
Post by: Vector on June 15, 2014, 05:51:32 pm
Post by: Parsely on June 15, 2014, 05:53:59 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on June 15, 2014, 05:59:49 pm
The thing I like about Myers-Briggs is that it's NOT like that. It measures you on 4 very clear dichotomies and builds profiles that are very different from each other. The two that I match up with as an INXP describe me really well, while none of the others do at all. Of course, you may not match up so well if you're not strongly expressed on any of those 4 dichotomies, but that's a good thing. It recognizes that people aren't binary, and rates you on a gradient. There just aren't profiles written up for people at various gradient levels. It shows you what the descriptors mean in an absolute sense and it's kind of up to you to figure out how you relate to that absolute based on where you place on the gradient scale.
Yeah, I guess if I read it as a description of the absolute INTP then a lot of differences make more sense. The description I found still feels a bit too horoscopey even when viewed like that.
I'm like 60% I, 50% N, 60% T, and 20% P. I used to be ~100% I and ~0% P/J. A lot can change in like five years, I guess.
...
I think I see what you're talking about now. They've changed the website a bit since I last looked at it. They used to have a second link after the test results that was much more technical and in-depth, but I can't find it now. If that hadn't been there when I was first introduced, I probably would have thought the same.
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 15, 2014, 06:00:58 pm
Post by: Putnam on June 15, 2014, 06:01:48 pm
Quote
...really accurate
You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an independent thinker and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic.
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 15, 2014, 06:04:30 pm
Post by: Vector on June 15, 2014, 06:06:58 pm
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 15, 2014, 06:08:08 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 15, 2014, 06:09:04 pm
Sometimes you're one thing, and sometimes you're its opposite? With no indication as to percentages? My god! A wild tautology has appeared!Kill it! Kill it before the sophomores see!
Post by: Putnam on June 15, 2014, 06:12:29 pm
Sometimes you're one thing, and sometimes you're its opposite? With no indication as to percentages? My god! A wild tautology has appeared!
Vector, that's such a [whatever Putnam is describing] thing to say.
I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read these.
Post by: Descan on June 15, 2014, 06:16:23 pm
Post by: MorleyDev on June 15, 2014, 06:39:33 pm
...
Those are Barnum statements (Forer effect, Barnum effect, whatever). Much like the Forer Effect itself, the Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator has been the subject of a lot of serious psychological studying. Whilst there are criticisms of the MBTI, Forer effect is not one of them.
Post by: sjm9876 on June 16, 2014, 03:25:08 am
Well, I'm still distinctly INTP. And the description is still freakishly accurate. It would be completely perfect if the word book instead read book/internet (or grammatically correct equivalent.)
Post by: hops on June 16, 2014, 04:13:14 am
Post by: Graknorke on June 17, 2014, 07:22:29 pm
No more than 25% in either direction from anything, generally. Never more than 75%.
Post by: Orange Wizard on June 17, 2014, 07:28:11 pm
These tests almost always show me as being Perfectly Normal™Huh, that's weird.
No more than 25% in either direction from anything, generally. Never more than 75%.
Post by: scrdest on June 18, 2014, 01:22:21 am
These tests almost always show me as being Perfectly Normal™
No more than 25% in either direction from anything, generally. Never more than 75%.
Which tests? MBTI, in particular, doesn't really have 'normal' or 'neutral'.
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 22, 2014, 08:54:52 am
Post by: Darvi on June 22, 2014, 09:28:53 am
I got Aslan. (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339) You guys should check this out too.It's him! He's the messiah!
Post by: WillowLuman on June 22, 2014, 06:27:52 pm
I got Aslan. (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339) You guys should check this out too.That trick question...
Post by: Orange Wizard on June 23, 2014, 01:47:22 am
I got Aslan. (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339) You guys should check this out too.That's about as in-depth as most personality tests available.
Post by: hops on June 23, 2014, 05:29:59 am
I got Aslan. (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339) You guys should check this out too.That quiz is way too long.
Post by: Graknorke on June 23, 2014, 05:32:10 am
I've set up a tent and a camping stove so I can work through to the finish.I got Aslan. (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339) You guys should check this out too.That quiz is way too long.
Post by: hops on June 23, 2014, 05:36:07 am
I'd have paid off my mortgage by the time I finish this thing.I've set up a tent and a camping stove so I can work through to the finish.I got Aslan. (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339) You guys should check this out too.That quiz is way too long.
And I don't even have a mortgage.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 23, 2014, 09:16:23 am
As such, MetalSlimeHunt becomes MikeSierraHotel. Sadly, or perhaps gladly, my name is not Mike.
You get the idea. Every capital or syllable becomes a letter. MaximumZero could be either MikeZulu or MikeIndianaZulu. RedKing would be RomeoKilo.
Then again, others would not be so easy. Vector either becomes Victor or VictorTango.
I'm interested in hearing other potential ways to alter existing usernames as well.
Post by: Arx on June 23, 2014, 09:17:47 am
Post by: RedKing on June 23, 2014, 09:21:53 am
I see somebody decided to make an example of me.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 23, 2014, 09:22:19 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 23, 2014, 09:23:46 am
Well, I guess that makes me Alfa. That was difficult. :POr AlfaRomeoXray.
Post by: penguinofhonor on June 23, 2014, 09:27:42 am
Post by: Frumple on June 23, 2014, 09:30:17 am
Post by: Darvi on June 23, 2014, 09:53:16 am
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on June 23, 2014, 10:03:05 am
Post by: Helgoland on June 23, 2014, 10:09:51 am
Post by: Xanmyral on June 23, 2014, 10:49:34 am
Syllable: Xray-Mike-Romeo
I'm apparently an alien "Romeo" named Mike.
Post by: Tawa on June 23, 2014, 11:01:48 am
I'm a dancing drunk Brown lover-boy. Go me.
Post by: miauw62 on June 23, 2014, 11:04:13 am
Post by: WillowLuman on June 23, 2014, 11:17:06 am
Post by: Darvi on June 23, 2014, 11:21:32 am
Post by: Haspen on June 23, 2014, 11:22:41 am
I think I'm part of POH's organization...
Post by: Graknorke on June 23, 2014, 11:32:58 am
How dull.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 23, 2014, 11:33:48 am
Syllables: Zulu Zulu Kilo Kilo Tango Golf
Post by: SealyStar on June 23, 2014, 11:38:54 am
Syllables: Sierra Lima Sierra.
Post by: Mesa on June 23, 2014, 11:44:35 am
Am I doing this right.
Post by: Haspen on June 23, 2014, 11:47:33 am
So many doubles lately!
Post by: WillowLuman on June 23, 2014, 11:57:46 am
Post by: Descan on June 23, 2014, 12:08:34 pm
The latter is a filthy abomination and the former is glorious mastah race.
Post by: Steelmagic on June 23, 2014, 12:13:58 pm
Could be worse, I suppose.
Post by: Powder Miner on June 23, 2014, 12:39:13 pm
Post by: Jopax on June 23, 2014, 12:47:01 pm
Expected something cooler tbh :C
Post by: Culise on June 23, 2014, 12:47:43 pm
(("Yeah, my middle name's Lima. Named for the city, not the bean."))
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2014, 12:56:02 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on June 23, 2014, 01:17:49 pm
I would be....oh.
I see somebody decided to make an example of me.
Post by: Tawa on June 23, 2014, 01:26:36 pm
Sierra Mike."Magic" is a two-syllable word, you know.
Could be worse, I suppose.
Post by: TD1 on June 23, 2014, 01:39:06 pm
Damn Yankees with their Oscar prizes!
Post by: Tawa on June 23, 2014, 01:40:20 pm
Post by: Steelmagic on June 23, 2014, 02:00:07 pm
Effort.Sierra Mike."Magic" is a two-syllable word, you know.
Could be worse, I suppose.
Alright if you go with syllables it's Sierra Mike Golf. Also I just realized the M isn't capital either.
Post by: SealyStar on June 23, 2014, 04:15:29 pm
"victor tango"Yeah!
I sound like a fucking Jaeger
Post by: Parsely on June 23, 2014, 04:43:58 pm
Post by: RedKing on June 23, 2014, 04:47:46 pm
Quiet, Mike Zulu. You and all your bloody Hottentots.I would be....oh.
I see somebody decided to make an example of me.
Post by: Itnetlolor on June 23, 2014, 04:48:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
As for my screenname: Indialima (I'm using that for an alias. Sounds pretty cool).
Post by: NAV on June 23, 2014, 05:10:40 pm
Post by: Greiger on June 23, 2014, 05:19:36 pm
But I hate that sport! It's boring!
Let me google a flowchart of the entire game.
Spoiler: First image on google images (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 23, 2014, 05:23:36 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on June 23, 2014, 05:30:14 pm
Post by: scrdest on June 23, 2014, 05:38:05 pm
Sierra Charlie Romeo Delta Sierra Tango
or nothing at all, because I have no capitals.
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 23, 2014, 06:31:15 pm
Syllabes: Lima Whiskey Sierra
Post by: Hubris Incalculable on June 23, 2014, 06:38:28 pm
syllables: Hotel Beta India Charlie Charlie Lima Beta
E: real initials: November Juliet Kilo
Post by: Arcvasti on June 23, 2014, 06:43:07 pm
The Alpha Victor Tango is a special dance only the most [INTENSE] Victors can do.
Post by: NAV on June 23, 2014, 06:44:50 pm
Post by: Fniff on June 23, 2014, 06:50:15 pm
Post by: AlleeCat on June 23, 2014, 07:06:05 pm
Then again, others would not be so easy. Vector either becomes Victor or VictorTango.What's our vector, Victor? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVq4_HhBK8Y)
As for my username, Alpha Charlie. Kinda boring. Alpha Tango Romeo would be my IRL initials.
Post by: Teneb on June 23, 2014, 07:23:03 pm
Real name gets intresting though: Romeo Hotel Whiskey Victor Delta Sierra
Post by: Glloyd on June 23, 2014, 07:29:53 pm
Real initials would be Golf Delta Lima.
Post by: MaximumZero on June 23, 2014, 08:05:29 pm
Post by: RedKing on June 23, 2014, 08:12:11 pm
Charlie Foxtrot Mike are mine.Heh....and of course, Charlie Foxtrot is a military euphemism for "clusterfuck".
My real initials would be Romeo Whiskey Papa. Which is actually pretty apt.
Post by: Darvi on June 23, 2014, 08:14:32 pm
Post by: SealyStar on June 23, 2014, 08:18:46 pm
That sounds... really lame. Probably better than "Sierra Sierra", but still.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 23, 2014, 08:21:13 pm
Post by: Tiruin on June 23, 2014, 08:22:16 pm
So this has nothing to do with polling, but I was thinking of a way to permutate my username and thought the NATO phonetic alphabet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet) would be a decent starting point.Are we poking on usernames or do I see people alphabetizing their real names? o_O
As such, MetalSlimeHunt becomes MikeSierraHotel. Sadly, or perhaps gladly, my name is not Mike.
You get the idea. Every capital or syllable becomes a letter. MaximumZero could be either MikeZulu or MikeIndianaZulu. RedKing would be RomeoKilo.
Then again, others would not be so easy. Vector either becomes Victor or VictorTango.
I'm interested in hearing other potential ways to alter existing usernames as well.
Because Tango is quite...bland. xD
Edit: SYLLABLES!
Tango Romeo India.
...
:v
Post by: WillowLuman on June 23, 2014, 08:24:20 pm
Post by: Tawa on June 23, 2014, 08:28:02 pm
WTF, I have Shakespeare people everywhere I go. This never happened before I started using Tawarochir as my internet name after I read LOTR.
Post by: Tiruin on June 23, 2014, 08:32:27 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on June 23, 2014, 08:34:54 pm
Post by: TD1 on June 23, 2014, 08:36:05 pm
Post by: Tawa on June 23, 2014, 08:38:40 pm
Real initials?Yes.
Post by: Powder Miner on June 23, 2014, 10:15:43 pm
DOUBLE ROMEO, HELLO LADIES
Post by: Vector on June 23, 2014, 10:16:55 pm
Post by: Steelmagic on June 23, 2014, 10:23:09 pm
To me it just sounds cooler than my username, however I'm still disappointed by the lack of Whiskey in my name, I'll have to talk to my parents about this disturbing revelation.
Post by: Skyrunner on June 23, 2014, 11:50:15 pm
Is it bad that I knew these without having to look them up? :P
Post by: LordSlowpoke on June 24, 2014, 12:11:10 am
what is a syllable even
Post by: Arx on June 24, 2014, 12:17:18 am
Post by: Tiruin on June 24, 2014, 03:04:09 am
Oh.Real initials?Yes.
It took me tons of context clues to get what you all meant by real initials.
Anyone could've said initials of real
Juliett Alfa Bravo
...Or did I get it that first, mid, surname ._.
Yeah. That acronym :V
lambda spaghettiPersonal research is your friend! :D
what is a syllable even
Post by: scrdest on June 24, 2014, 03:49:55 am
Juliett Kilo Mike
Post by: Arx on June 24, 2014, 04:33:07 am
Also, Alpha Romeo X-ray sounds like a car.
Post by: da_nang on June 24, 2014, 05:03:52 am
Post by: Mesa on June 24, 2014, 05:20:24 am
Yeah I have two middle names. Formally only one, but whatever.
I'm not Mike though.
Post by: scrdest on June 24, 2014, 05:28:50 am
Mike Mike Mike Sierra (irl initials...well, technically, since there's no Ś equivalent in the phonetic alphabet so I went with S.).
Yeah I have two middle names. Formally only one, but whatever.
I'm not Mike though.
Your parents really fricking loved names starting with M, didn't they?
Post by: Haspen on June 24, 2014, 05:31:12 am
Post by: hops on June 24, 2014, 06:46:37 am
My username gets Oscarjuliettango
My real name gets Mike Whiskeysierrayankeeromeo
Post by: Mesa on June 24, 2014, 06:47:30 am
Mike Mike Mike Sierra (irl initials...well, technically, since there's no Ś equivalent in the phonetic alphabet so I went with S.).
Yeah I have two middle names. Formally only one, but whatever.
I'm not Mike though.
Your parents really fricking loved names starting with M, didn't they?
Well, they did love the first two Mikes. The third one was my own choice, but frankly keeps with the theme. :P
Post by: hops on June 24, 2014, 06:50:52 am
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 24, 2014, 06:55:20 am
Post by: Darvi on June 24, 2014, 06:57:47 am
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 24, 2014, 06:59:01 am
Post by: Skyrunner on June 24, 2014, 06:59:37 am
You don't have a middle name if you have four names. None of them's actually in the middle!Take the average of the two surrounding the middle. It's how you find the median.
Post by: Darvi on June 24, 2014, 07:04:36 am
Post by: darkpaladin109 on June 24, 2014, 07:07:53 am
Post by: Skyrunner on June 24, 2014, 07:12:42 am
Methinks you mean the median.You didn't saw nothin'.
Post by: Mephisto on June 24, 2014, 03:25:28 pm
Mike Papa (or Foxtrot, if you go by sound instead of letter) Sierra (or Tango depending on where you end the prior syllable)
Real:
Tango Delta Papa
I get the feeling I should start a Latin dance school under the name Papa Tango.
Post by: MaximumZero on June 24, 2014, 08:59:34 pm
Also, I lol'd at Vector's Echo Whiskey Echo.
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 01:42:31 pm
By syllables: Mike Tango Charlie
...kinda boring.
Real Initials: Charlie Echo Lima (unless you use my maiden last name, then Kilo.)
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 01:43:52 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 01:45:32 pm
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 01:47:45 pm
Post by: TD1 on June 26, 2014, 01:49:47 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 01:50:37 pm
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 01:51:16 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 01:52:12 pm
Chee-se would be pronounced "cheesy", and it's not.
So no, no friends for you.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 01:54:32 pm
On a more serious note, Cheesy would be pronounced chee-si. Chee-ze would be cheese.
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 01:58:18 pm
So when you take out the letters that aren't actually being pronounced in and of themselves, it's just "chees", which is pronounced more like "cheez", which is really only a single syllable.
...this is the strangest debate I've been in.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 01:59:40 pm
Still, thanks. Now I know how to pronounce it correctly.
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 02:00:40 pm
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 02:02:33 pm
Oh, ok, I guess that means we can be friends, then.Yay for friendship! Now I need to go write a friendship speech...
Post by: Darvi on June 26, 2014, 02:03:46 pm
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 02:04:45 pm
An discussion about silent vowels? This is getting silly.Silly? This. Is. CHEESE!
I don't even know... Still, it was very important.
Post by: mastahcheese on June 26, 2014, 02:06:02 pm
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on June 26, 2014, 02:07:42 pm
Post by: hops on June 27, 2014, 08:15:46 am
MTCHS.
Post by: scrdest on June 27, 2014, 08:44:12 am
Surely the best solution is to pronounce mastahcheese's username in one syllable.
MTCHS.
MST'HC'HS (the apostrophes separate the letters so you don't pronounce them as digraphs).
Post by: hops on June 27, 2014, 08:54:06 am
Post by: Haspen on June 27, 2014, 08:58:17 am
Post by: Cheeetar on June 27, 2014, 12:10:24 pm
Post by: scrdest on June 27, 2014, 12:50:17 pm
Juliett Oscar (same as my normal first middle name, surprisingly enough) Tango Mike. I quite like it.
Sounds like a movie. Juliett Oscar & Tango Mike Do Shit
Post by: Tawa on June 27, 2014, 12:53:10 pm
MST'HC'HSTrying to pronounce that comes out with "moustaches".
Post by: vagel7 on June 27, 2014, 02:37:35 pm
Forum: Victor Golf Seven
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 29, 2014, 11:02:56 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Pew Research has released a political typology quiz. (http://www.people-press.org/quiz/political-typology/) While I imagine the vast majority of us are going to get the same result I did, Solid Liberal, it's interesting enough. The report it is linked to also shows some valuable data.
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 11:10:09 am
Post by: Lagslayer on June 29, 2014, 11:25:22 am
I don't like the binary answers of the questions, nor how few there were. It feels like the test is trying to pigeonhole you into specific results.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on June 29, 2014, 11:27:48 am
huzzah?
Post by: Glloyd on June 29, 2014, 11:30:27 am
What I didn't like is how a good number of questions were about America. I get that it's an American quiz, but some of the issues asked in the questions just aren't issues in Canada, and I bet other countries as well. Like all the questions about African Americans. Yes, I think my country has done enough for African Canadians. In Canada, the real question would be about Aboriginals.
Post by: SalmonGod on June 29, 2014, 11:30:34 am
I think the lesson I take away from this is my political priorities just don't align well with mainstream American politics. I think I should be considered a Young Outsider, honestly.
Post by: TD1 on June 29, 2014, 11:33:40 am
Post by: Glloyd on June 29, 2014, 11:36:51 am
I'm solid liberal. Most of the questions were split-second no-brainers to me. A couple were more difficult, but I decided to answer those from a broader perspective - such as the one about government being wasteful and inefficient. I decided that OUR government is always wasteful and inefficient, but it CAN do much better than people give it credit for, if they would only look at other examples besides our own. Maybe not in the spirit of the question? But otherwise, pure liberal on every point presented... which kinda irks me, because I don't think the resulting description describes me at all. I'm not at all optimistic about the future of the country and I mostly dislike Democrat politicians just as much as Republicans, because both parties are equally horrible on the issues I find most important.
I think the lesson I take away from this is my political priorities just don't align well with mainstream American politics. I think I should be considered a Young Outsider, honestly.
Yeah. I dislike both the Republicans and the Democrats as well, but that's because the Democrats' politics align more with the Conservative party in my country, than either the Liberals, the NDP (socialists), the Greens or the Bloc Quebecois. I think if the test was less American centric, it would have more meaningful results.
Post by: Descan on June 29, 2014, 11:40:20 am
Also, Fuck Obama so hard. :I Solid Liberal my ass, fuck that drone-using weak-willed c... ountry boy so hard.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on June 29, 2014, 11:40:51 am
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 11:41:32 am
Also, Fuck Obama so hard. :I Solid Liberal my ass, fuck that drone-using weak-willed c... ountry boy so hard.Ha, Liberal Obama :P.
Post by: Graknorke on June 29, 2014, 11:43:25 am
Even though I'm not murrican so a decent number of the answers I have were probably not what they were looking for.
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on June 29, 2014, 11:44:51 am
Post by: Descan on June 29, 2014, 11:45:21 am
Got Solid Liberal, but am probably more of a Faith and Family Liberal. (Despite being agnostic, I'm socially conservative by nature). The questions they use as a litmus test for social conservatism need to be updated- there are plenty of young evangelicals who are fine with gay marriage, for example, but positions on abortion have pretty much held steady across all age groups in the past forty years.Used to be that people for gay marriage were pretty solidly in the "As long as y'all don't hurt someone, do what ya want", which includes most of the other "traditionally liberal" ideas, with the possible exception of abortion, depending on whether you consider a fetus a "someone" to hurt or not.
Now-a-days, less clear cut. People could be for gay marriage for other reasons besides a general liberal attitude since it's become normalized, so they might be for it, but more in-line in other social issues with a conserative outlook.
Post by: Tawa on June 29, 2014, 11:49:22 am
Young Outsider, apparently. Never heard of 'em before.Ditto.
I lean more toward liberalism by heart, so that quiz was kinda lame. Skeptic would've fit me better.
Post by: TD1 on June 29, 2014, 11:57:01 am
Post by: Tawa on June 29, 2014, 12:13:36 pm
Dammit, Taw! Stop trying to steal my life!
Sorry--
quote him
SHUT UP LEWS THERIN I'M NOT GOING TO QUOTE HIM
QUOTE HIM
NEVER
QUOTE HIM HAHAHAHAHAH
AAAAA
Post by: mastahcheese on June 29, 2014, 12:26:26 pm
Not really surprised.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on June 29, 2014, 12:30:16 pm
Got Solid Liberal, but am probably more of a Faith and Family Liberal. (Despite being agnostic, I'm socially conservative by nature). The questions they use as a litmus test for social conservatism need to be updated- there are plenty of young evangelicals who are fine with gay marriage, for example, but positions on abortion have pretty much held steady across all age groups in the past forty years.Used to be that people for gay marriage were pretty solidly in the "As long as y'all don't hurt someone, do what ya want", which includes most of the other "traditionally liberal" ideas, with the possible exception of abortion, depending on whether you consider a fetus a "someone" to hurt or not.
Now-a-days, less clear cut. People could be for gay marriage for other reasons besides a general liberal attitude since it's become normalized, so they might be for it, but more in-line in other social issues with a conserative outlook.
Right. Not everyone who supports gay marriage is a sex-positive young college student from the Bay Area. (Many sex-positive young college students forget this, then get angry when people who are nominally on the same side of the political spectrum as they are have the gall to hold the right positions for the "wrong reasons". I've known a few.)
I suspect something similar is operating with drug legalization- I'm in favor of pot legalization, for example, and lowering the drinking age back to eighteen, but I'm definitely not going to defend someone who sells their kids' possessions to buy meth. In other words, I'm still in favor of a war on drugs, even if I'm staunchly against the War on Drugs as she is waged. I can expound on this, but my proposed solution is fairly unorthodox.
Post by: WillowLuman on June 29, 2014, 12:32:12 pm
Post by: Guardian G.I. on June 29, 2014, 12:35:31 pm
Post by: 10ebbor10 on June 29, 2014, 12:40:20 pm
Anyway L+ Solid liberal here.
Post by: Putnam on June 29, 2014, 12:47:22 pm
Also,
"Most say they always vote Democratic and are unflagging supporters of Barack Obama"
lol
Post by: Descan on June 29, 2014, 12:47:47 pm
I'm in favour of legalizing everything, and then getting a secular version of "AA" (Addictions, not just alcohol) for those who cannot handle it. "Punish" (more like, help) the consequences of doing something, not just doing it. I.E. Child endangerment, reckless driving or DUIs, reckless use of a giant bulldozer, etc.Got Solid Liberal, but am probably more of a Faith and Family Liberal. (Despite being agnostic, I'm socially conservative by nature). The questions they use as a litmus test for social conservatism need to be updated- there are plenty of young evangelicals who are fine with gay marriage, for example, but positions on abortion have pretty much held steady across all age groups in the past forty years.Used to be that people for gay marriage were pretty solidly in the "As long as y'all don't hurt someone, do what ya want", which includes most of the other "traditionally liberal" ideas, with the possible exception of abortion, depending on whether you consider a fetus a "someone" to hurt or not.
Now-a-days, less clear cut. People could be for gay marriage for other reasons besides a general liberal attitude since it's become normalized, so they might be for it, but more in-line in other social issues with a conserative outlook.
Right. Not everyone who supports gay marriage is a sex-positive young college student from the Bay Area. (Many sex-positive young college students forget this, then get angry when people who are nominally on the same side of the political spectrum as they are have the gall to hold the right positions for the "wrong reasons". I've known a few.)
I suspect something similar is operating with drug legalization- I'm in favor of pot legalization, for example, and lowering the drinking age back to eighteen, but I'm definitely not going to defend someone who sells their kids' possessions to buy meth. In other words, I'm still in favor of a war on drugs, even if I'm staunchly against the War on Drugs as she is waged. I can expound on this, but my proposed solution is fairly unorthodox.
Not to say that I think everyone and their mother should go out and do meth like people drink booze, but I don't think that illegality is any fix, and just makes things worse. Especially because I've seen tidbits of interesting studies that point to addiction being a matter of social and economic exclusion than anything about "addictive personalities", i.e. for the most part, people in good situations don't do drugs, or try and get off drugs if they're already physically addicted*. Hence, making it illegal just hurts the chances of them going to get help, for fear of getting thrown in jail.
*The existence of "cocaine is a rich-mans drug" is the reason I think it's "interesting" and "points to". More studies! MOAR.
But yeah, s'long as you ain't hurting anyone or doing anything (besides the drug itself) illegal, I see no reason to interfere. On a political, general level. On a personal level, I want my wot-cuddle-bro to stop smoking, but that's on a personal level. Personal things and views should only interefere with political views in terms of what you think needs to be an end-goal, not in terms of what needs to be done to get to that end-goal. Best-practices fills the "means" part.
Post by: scrdest on June 29, 2014, 12:49:13 pm
Post by: Helgoland on June 29, 2014, 01:01:10 pm
It's weird how I'd have picked other options sometimes if the quiz had been about Europe.
Post by: Graknorke on June 29, 2014, 01:02:53 pm
Next-Gen Left, probably because I don't think 'too much profit' is a thing.No, I picked not too much as well (really, what is 'too much'? The amount they make is appropriate for the revenue and costs of the business. I don't see how you could have too much). Still put me in Solid Liberal.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on June 29, 2014, 01:03:56 pm
I'm in favour of legalizing everything, and then getting a secular version of "AA" (Addictions, not just alcohol) for those who cannot handle it. "Punish" (more like, help) the consequences of doing something, not just doing it. I.E. Child endangerment, reckless driving or DUIs, reckless use of a giant bulldozer, etc.Got Solid Liberal, but am probably more of a Faith and Family Liberal. (Despite being agnostic, I'm socially conservative by nature). The questions they use as a litmus test for social conservatism need to be updated- there are plenty of young evangelicals who are fine with gay marriage, for example, but positions on abortion have pretty much held steady across all age groups in the past forty years.Used to be that people for gay marriage were pretty solidly in the "As long as y'all don't hurt someone, do what ya want", which includes most of the other "traditionally liberal" ideas, with the possible exception of abortion, depending on whether you consider a fetus a "someone" to hurt or not.
Now-a-days, less clear cut. People could be for gay marriage for other reasons besides a general liberal attitude since it's become normalized, so they might be for it, but more in-line in other social issues with a conserative outlook.
Right. Not everyone who supports gay marriage is a sex-positive young college student from the Bay Area. (Many sex-positive young college students forget this, then get angry when people who are nominally on the same side of the political spectrum as they are have the gall to hold the right positions for the "wrong reasons". I've known a few.)
I suspect something similar is operating with drug legalization- I'm in favor of pot legalization, for example, and lowering the drinking age back to eighteen, but I'm definitely not going to defend someone who sells their kids' possessions to buy meth. In other words, I'm still in favor of a war on drugs, even if I'm staunchly against the War on Drugs as she is waged. I can expound on this, but my proposed solution is fairly unorthodox.
Not to say that I think everyone and their mother should go out and do meth like people drink booze, but I don't think that illegality is any fix, and just makes things worse. Especially because I've seen tidbits of interesting studies that point to addiction being a matter of social and economic exclusion than anything about "addictive personalities", i.e. for the most part, people in good situations don't do drugs, or try and get off drugs if they're already physically addicted*. Hence, making it illegal just hurts the chances of them going to get help, for fear of getting thrown in jail.
*The existence of "cocaine is a rich-mans drug" is the reason I think it's "interesting" and "points to". More studies! MOAR.
But yeah, s'long as you ain't hurting anyone or doing anything (besides the drug itself) illegal, I see no reason to interfere. On a political, general level. On a personal level, I want my wot-cuddle-bro to stop smoking, but that's on a personal level. Personal things and views should only interefere with political views in terms of what you think needs to be an end-goal, not in terms of what needs to be done to get to that end-goal. Best-practices fills the "means" part.
I'm not particularly concerned about the right of people who do meth not to go to jail. People have families, relationships and jobs; substance abuse creates collateral damage, and hard drug users aren't innocent because of some half-baked argument about personal autonomy.
No, what I'm concerned about is that the War on Drugs has become a bonanza for organized crime and fuelled political instability and massacres from Afghanistan to Colombia. A better option- as I have said, this is unorthodox- is for the government (yes!) to create state drug shops that do not card, do not have cameras, do not record customers, and sell hard drugs at very low prices. Law enforcement will concern itself not with going after dealers (which will disappear, since they can't compete with the state stores) but with end-users; for example, if a drug test you did showed cocaine or meth use, that would be reported. Voilà: by making a 180 on the current legal stance (switching from arresting dealers and leaving users more or less alone to making dealing legal and use illegal), you've cut off the taps on drug cartels' sources of income without condoning hard drug use.
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 01:05:00 pm
I fully support this line of reasoning. From a legal perspective, the definition of wronghood is the infringement of someone's rights, and if you're not doing that there's no reason you shouldn't be allowed to do anything. In other words, doing drugs is fine, but if you commit a crime while under them there is no excuse and the perpetrator faces capital punishment. There's no good reason why vehicular manslaughter and vehicular manslaughter under the influence should be different offenses.I'm in favour of legalizing everything, and then getting a secular version of "AA" (Addictions, not just alcohol) for those who cannot handle it. "Punish" (more like, help) the consequences of doing something, not just doing it. I.E. Child endangerment, reckless driving or DUIs, reckless use of a giant bulldozer, etc.Got Solid Liberal, but am probably more of a Faith and Family Liberal. (Despite being agnostic, I'm socially conservative by nature). The questions they use as a litmus test for social conservatism need to be updated- there are plenty of young evangelicals who are fine with gay marriage, for example, but positions on abortion have pretty much held steady across all age groups in the past forty years.Used to be that people for gay marriage were pretty solidly in the "As long as y'all don't hurt someone, do what ya want", which includes most of the other "traditionally liberal" ideas, with the possible exception of abortion, depending on whether you consider a fetus a "someone" to hurt or not.
Now-a-days, less clear cut. People could be for gay marriage for other reasons besides a general liberal attitude since it's become normalized, so they might be for it, but more in-line in other social issues with a conserative outlook.
Right. Not everyone who supports gay marriage is a sex-positive young college student from the Bay Area. (Many sex-positive young college students forget this, then get angry when people who are nominally on the same side of the political spectrum as they are have the gall to hold the right positions for the "wrong reasons". I've known a few.)
I suspect something similar is operating with drug legalization- I'm in favor of pot legalization, for example, and lowering the drinking age back to eighteen, but I'm definitely not going to defend someone who sells their kids' possessions to buy meth. In other words, I'm still in favor of a war on drugs, even if I'm staunchly against the War on Drugs as she is waged. I can expound on this, but my proposed solution is fairly unorthodox.
Not to say that I think everyone and their mother should go out and do meth like people drink booze, but I don't think that illegality is any fix, and just makes things worse. Especially because I've seen tidbits of interesting studies that point to addiction being a matter of social and economic exclusion than anything about "addictive personalities", i.e. for the most part, people in good situations don't do drugs, or try and get off drugs if they're already physically addicted*. Hence, making it illegal just hurts the chances of them going to get help, for fear of getting thrown in jail.
*The existence of "cocaine is a rich-mans drug" is the reason I think it's "interesting" and "points to". More studies! MOAR.
But yeah, s'long as you ain't hurting anyone or doing anything (besides the drug itself) illegal, I see no reason to interfere. On a political, general level. On a personal level, I want my wot-cuddle-bro to stop smoking, but that's on a personal level. Personal things and views should only interefere with political views in terms of what you think needs to be an end-goal, not in terms of what needs to be done to get to that end-goal. Best-practices fills the "means" part.
Post by: Culise on June 29, 2014, 01:13:13 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on June 29, 2014, 01:19:51 pm
-snip for length-Woah, capital punishment for any crime commited under the influence? And how does sanctioning sales but criminalizing use make any sense? That's basically entrapment. It's precisely because we throw everyone who uses or even touches illegal substances in prison (while the dealers don't get caught nearly as often, due to how few of them there are compared to users) that our prisons are so overcrowded. We don't need to go around locking up addicts, we need to break their addiction. I believe legalizing and regulating substances would be a big blow to organized crime, but continuing America's appalling prison practices is a bad idea.
Post by: scrdest on June 29, 2014, 01:23:02 pm
-snip for length-Woah, capital punishment for any crime commited under the influence? And how does sanctioning sales but criminalizing use make any sense? That's basically entrapment. It's precisely because we throw everyone who uses or even touches illegal substances in prison (while the dealers don't get caught nearly as often, due to how few of them there are compared to users) that our prisons are so overcrowded. We don't need to go around locking up addicts, we need to break their addiction. I believe legalizing and regulating substances would be a big blow to organized crime, but continuing America's appalling prison practices is a bad idea.
No - Remuthra's (and mine, in fact) argument is that if you kill someone just because, you get the same sentence if you killed someone because you took PCP and voices told you to. Murder is murder, vehicular manslaughter is vehicular manslaughter, and if you did that, what matters is that your actions have directly led to this happening.
Post by: Graknorke on June 29, 2014, 01:24:23 pm
Post by: scrdest on June 29, 2014, 01:26:46 pm
If intent doesn't matter, what's the point of having manslaughter as a crime at all?
Intent does matter. That's why it'd be vehicular manslaughter, not murder - you didn't decide running over random people was a good idea because hey, ethanol!, you just couldn't control the car.
On the other hand, if your brain tells you you should kill someone and munch on their body, it's really unlikely what happens is an accident. Hence, murder.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on June 29, 2014, 01:29:48 pm
is this a reference to the superhero florida man
Post by: MaximumZero on June 29, 2014, 01:41:55 pm
Post by: Dutchling on June 29, 2014, 01:44:34 pm
I dont even own a console.
Post by: Darvi on June 29, 2014, 01:57:00 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on June 29, 2014, 02:29:02 pm
Post by: Glloyd on June 29, 2014, 02:32:18 pm
I wouldn't call the NDP socialist any more. Everyone except the Greens have taken a bloody step towards the Right, at least in Ontario.
Yeah, I was talking on the Federal level. Even then, they're more Social Democrats now. In Ontario though, everything's just a fucking mess. It's been more of the same for the last 15-20 years. I just wish more people in ON voted Green, so we could have a change from those 3.
EDIT: This makes me want to start a Canadian politics Megathread. Interest?
Yeah, I think we can all agree that the test could have been done better.
Here here.
Post by: Descan on June 29, 2014, 02:37:11 pm
I think more people would vote Green if the vote had been proportional. The greens got 5% of the vote even without that, that would have been 5 (or more, depending on how it's proportional) seats right there. If people knew that voting green would actually mean something, regardless of how their riding went, then I think even more would have voted green. As it is, strategic voting :/ Add in a ranking vote of some description, and I think the greens would be a viable third party, at least enough to rival the NDP.
Post by: Glloyd on June 29, 2014, 02:52:39 pm
As for the Canadian Politics thread, I'll start one up when I get home.
Post by: Greiger on June 29, 2014, 02:59:35 pm
So I'm doubtful of that result. I really feel more that the current U.S. political system needs to be reevaluated and there needs to be drastic voting reform. Whatever that would be called probably supersedes any of the outcomes on the list at any rate.
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 03:01:24 pm
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on June 29, 2014, 03:03:48 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 29, 2014, 03:16:12 pm
Your best fit is...
Steadfast Conservative
along with 12% of the public.
2012 vote: 5% for Obama | 85% for Romney
This overwhelmingly Republican group holds very conservative attitudes across most issues, including social policy and the size and scope of government. However, they generally are critical of business and Wall Street. Overall, Steadfast Conservatives also express highly negative attitudes toward immigrants and take a skeptical view of U.S. global involvement.
Meh
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 03:16:46 pm
I took it for the lulz and got Next Generation Left. Can an American explain what does that even mean? I'm afraid I don't always understand what's going on in your politics.As best as I can tell, it means Democratic Young Conservatives.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on June 29, 2014, 03:47:48 pm
Huh. Never thought of myself as a conservative. I thought I expressed pro-goverment and socially liberal views in the quiz... But duh, what do I care anyway. Thanks.I took it for the lulz and got Next Generation Left. Can an American explain what does that even mean? I'm afraid I don't always understand what's going on in your politics.As best as I can tell, it means Democratic Young Conservatives.
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 04:08:46 pm
Note the Democrat part there :P.Huh. Never thought of myself as a conservative. I thought I expressed pro-goverment and socially liberal views in the quiz... But duh, what do I care anyway. Thanks.I took it for the lulz and got Next Generation Left. Can an American explain what does that even mean? I'm afraid I don't always understand what's going on in your politics.As best as I can tell, it means Democratic Young Conservatives.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 29, 2014, 04:09:20 pm
Post by: Owlbread on June 29, 2014, 05:18:59 pm
It feels so odd being described as a "Liberal". It's incorrect terminology, American customs be damned.
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 29, 2014, 05:19:55 pm
Post by: Karlito on June 29, 2014, 05:52:55 pm
Post by: Tiruin on June 29, 2014, 05:55:07 pm
It feels so...erh. Not that deep in considering ideas.
Post by: XXSockXX on June 29, 2014, 06:11:27 pm
Hard-Pressed Skeptic
along with 13% of the public.
2012 vote: 62% for Obama | 23% for Romney
Quote
Deeply financially-stressed and distrustful of government, Hard-Pressed Skeptics have reservations about both political parties, but more lean toward the Democratic Party. In general, they want government to do more to solve problems, but have doubts about its efficiency. Hard-Pressed Skeptics are among the most cynical about the ability of individuals to improve their lot through hard work. These attitudes may reflect their distressed financial conditions: Hard-Pressed Skeptics have the lowest average family incomes of any of the typology groups.Huh, Crap.
Thanks Obama...
Post by: Vector on June 29, 2014, 06:24:59 pm
Post by: Teneb on June 29, 2014, 06:41:30 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on June 29, 2014, 06:51:59 pm
2012 vote: 37% for Obama | 48% for Romney
This relatively young, largely independent group holds a mix of conservative and liberal views. And while more lean toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, Young Outsiders generally express unfavorable opinions of both major parties. They are largely skeptical of activist government, as a substantial majority views government as wasteful and inefficient. Yet many diverge from the two conservative typology groups – Steadfast Conservatives and Business Conservatives – in their strong support for the environment and many liberal social policies.
Post by: Helgoland on June 29, 2014, 07:13:43 pm
Post by: Angle on June 29, 2014, 07:15:29 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on June 29, 2014, 07:26:21 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 29, 2014, 07:29:03 pm
"Solid Liberal", apparently, with 89% for Obama and 3% for Romney. People in my group are solid Democrats and "unflagging supporters" of Barack Obama. This is rather amusing given that I wouldn't vote for Obama if you paid me.How about if you knew that Rick Santorum would become President of the United States if you didn't? Keep in mind that the American right-wing agrees with this sort of thing. (http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/22031823-452/modern-scotland-is-deep-in-socialism.html) Can't afford to be picky.
Quote
It feels so odd being described as a "Liberal". It's incorrect terminology, American customs be damned.It's not even remotely incorrect. Classical Liberalism became fused with Socialism during the New Deal Era, and the former name stuck while the latter did not.
Post by: Owlbread on June 29, 2014, 07:39:22 pm
Displeased with Obama != Wouldn't vote for the guy. When the only alternative is someone like Romney (whose ass Wall Street has stuck its hand up into so far that he's called 'Mitt'), that ineffective centrist becomes slightly more appealing...
Actually in my case it does. I would write in Stewart Alexander given that Bernie Sanders chose not to run.
How about if you knew that Rick Santorum would become President of the United States if you didn't? Keep in mind that the American right-wing agrees with this sort of thing. (http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/22031823-452/modern-scotland-is-deep-in-socialism.html) Can't afford to be picky.
Tactical voting. That's a hard one. It's like asking me if I'd vote Tory to keep UKIP out. I probably would if it was really that close and if Rick Santorum or Rick Perry was the Republican candidate, but it would have to be a very close race. Nine times out of ten I'd be writing in Bernie Sanders or Stewart Alexander or even Peta Lindsay depending on who chose to run.
EDIT:
Thinking about it, I dislike the Democrats so intensely I would probably end up writing in Stewart Alexander anyway. I'm usually an advocate of tactical voting but when the choices are as bad as that I'd probably just go for what I actually believe in.
Quote
It's not even remotely incorrect. Classical Liberalism became fused with Socialism during the New Deal Era, and the former name stuck while the latter did not.
Can you explain why it is correct to call American Liberals "Liberals" and not Social Democrats when they are predominantly Social Democrats? The only "Liberal" thing about them seems to be their heritage, but that smells an awful lot like calling British Labour "Socialists" because they used to be Socialist decades ago.
I suppose it is possible to be a "socially conservative" Social Democrat i.e. you advocate the redistribution of wealth and the creation of an American NHS but you disagree with drug legalisation and equal marriage, so American Liberals are "socially liberal" Social Democrats in that sense.
Post by: SalmonGod on June 29, 2014, 07:42:17 pm
Displeased with Obama != Wouldn't vote for the guy. When the only alternative is someone like Romney (whose ass Wall Street has stuck its hand up into so far that he's called 'Mitt'), that ineffective centrist becomes slightly more appealing...
May have been true in 2012, but keep in mind that Obama received way more support from Wall St vs McCain in 2008... May have had a thing or two to do with how things played out after the financial crisis that same year...
As for tactical voting, my stance is still that when you have two shitty choices forced upon you, the only way not to legitimize the power being plainly exercised over you is to not choose.
Post by: Angle on June 29, 2014, 07:45:16 pm
Frankly, I think we need to start making an end run around the government. much of what we want can be instituted in other fashions.
Post by: Owlbread on June 29, 2014, 07:46:00 pm
As for tactical voting, my stance is still that when you have two shitty choices forced upon you, the only way not to legitimize the power being plainly exercised over you is to not choose.
Or to express what you really believe, so in my case it would have involved writing in Alexander or Lindsay.
Post by: Vector on June 29, 2014, 07:47:40 pm
Post by: Darvi on June 29, 2014, 07:49:11 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on June 29, 2014, 07:54:00 pm
As for tactical voting, my stance is still that when you have two shitty choices forced upon you, the only way not to legitimize the power being plainly exercised over you is to not choose.
Or to express what you really believe, so in my case it would have involved writing in Alexander or Lindsay.
Or that. Just don't allow your choices to be constrained. It's all a mind game. It only works because we allow it.
I find that a lot of political tactics match up pretty well with parenting tricks. The way elections operate is the same way I was able to smoothly discipline my children for years. If one of my kids did something wrong and I bluntly stated what their punishment would be, they would act all violated and resist every time. But I found that if I presented them with two punishment options and asked them to choose, they would calmly make their selection and carry out their sentence with hardly any fuss. I'm both proud and frustrated to say that it only worked for a few years. I'm wondering when it will stop working on America.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 29, 2014, 08:04:31 pm
Can you explain why it is correct to call American Liberals "Liberals" and not Social Democrats when they are predominantly Social Democrats? The only "Liberal" thing about them seems to be their heritage, but that smells an awful lot like calling British Labour "Socialists" because they used to be Socialist decades ago.Well, firstly, they aren't predominantly Social Democrats. The American Left you see on the internet might give you that impression, but that's because we've got the whole "young radicals" thing going for us. It's a very Big Tent situation. Same with the right. The theocrats don't really give a shit about what the robber barons want, they just have non-conflicting interests, so an alliance is logical.
I suppose it is possible to be a "socially conservative" Social Democrat i.e. you advocate the redistribution of wealth and the creation of an American NHS but you disagree with drug legalisation and equal marriage, so American Liberals are "socially liberal" Social Democrats in that sense.
Spoiler: Going off topic, but this was too amusing to delete. (click to show/hide)
It's not like Labour because we altered the definition of Liberal. What I describe is what virtually every American thinks of when the word Liberal is used. The fusion has existed for so long it isn't going to come apart for the foreseeable future. So, by definition, in American political discourse, when one talks about "them damn Liberals ruining the country", they are referring to what exists in a factual sense. Conversely, Labour just wants to use the language of socialism while getting the benefits of centrism. Your PoliSci definitions do not take predominance over those elsewhere in the world.
Post by: Owlbread on June 29, 2014, 08:10:36 pm
Spoiler: I am going to save this though, I enjoyed it. (click to show/hide)
Quote
It's not like Labour because we altered the definition of Liberal. What I describe is what virtually every American thinks of when the word Liberal is used. The fusion has existed for so long it isn't going to come apart for the foreseeable future.
But... but it's wrong. It must be altered. Even if it is not in my lifetime I will continue to crusade against it, just as I crusade against those who say "I could give a damn" when they really mean "I couldn't give a damn".
Post by: Angle on June 29, 2014, 08:20:20 pm
Or that. Just don't allow your choices to be constrained. It's all a mind game. It only works because we allow it.
Well, no, it works because a significant portion of the country goes along with it. I do agree that it's not a good thing, but you can't just afford to ignore it. Take 2000, for example. If all the people who'd voted for third parties or not voted at all had voted for Al Gore, we could have had an entirely different next eight years. Now we've moved so far to the right, Al Gore looks like a liberal wet dream. I do admit, it's not the only cause- if all the democrats who'd voted for bush had voted differently, it'd have had the same effect.
Post by: WillowLuman on June 29, 2014, 08:47:06 pm
Post by: Steeled on June 29, 2014, 09:04:47 pm
Post by: Eagle_eye on June 29, 2014, 09:09:41 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Well, that's...half right? I support the Democrats, but that's because the Republican party is bordering on fascism, not because I particularly like the Democrats. I'm definitely not an unflagging supporter of Obama. In my opinion, he's basically a transplanted, less effective Eisenhower, definitely not anywhere on the left. And I'm sure as hell not optimistic.
Post by: Angle on June 29, 2014, 09:11:06 pm
A third party trying to win on a national level is almost pointless. It's far better to win local elections and gradually change the demographic. I know a lot of people that just vote democrat or republican just because of the little letter on the ballot. In my state the Greens and Libertarians have started to gain a small bit of traction.
See, now that's actually a good idea, and I agree with you. Even better, it's a coherent argument with which I can interact. Now if you'd only argue this coherently on the Occupy Wallstreet thread...
Post by: MaximumZero on June 29, 2014, 09:28:15 pm
Post by: Owlbread on June 29, 2014, 09:31:30 pm
I really, really wish we had some actual lefties here in the us.
You do, you can find many in the Green Party, Peace and Freedom Party, Socialist Party and Socialism and Liberation Party. There's also a lot of people who call themselves "Liberal" when they're almost Democratic Socialists, or at least Social Democrats.
A third party trying to win on a national level is almost pointless. It's far better to win local elections and gradually change the demographic. I know a lot of people that just vote democrat or republican just because of the little letter on the ballot. In my state the Greens and Libertarians have started to gain a small bit of traction.
This is how the SNP grew from a crack pot minor party to the party of Scottish government. It did take them roughly 70 years though.
Post by: Remuthra on June 29, 2014, 09:55:22 pm
This is how the SNP grew from a crack pot minor party to the party of Scottish government. It did take them roughly 70 years though.And Scotland isn't nearly as two-party-centric as certain countries, either.
Post by: alexandertnt on June 29, 2014, 10:01:54 pm
No suprise there, the questions were mostly "Are you a liberal or a conservative".
Post by: SealyStar on June 29, 2014, 10:04:48 pm
I dunno... I'm not sure that I don't care about a social safety net, it's more that I don't really think the government does very well at administering the current ones.
Post by: Helgoland on June 30, 2014, 03:57:32 am
[...] when you have two shitty choices forced upon you, the only way not to legitimize the power being plainly exercised over you is to not choose.Oh Salmon, you so lefty~
The real rift is between those who believe in Realpolitik and those who don't, isn't it?
Post by: scrdest on June 30, 2014, 05:23:02 am
I really, really wish we had some actual lefties here in the us.
I don't. I still have flashbacks to Minecraft Forums Communists *shudder*.
Post by: Helgoland on June 30, 2014, 05:51:45 am
Post by: Knit tie on June 30, 2014, 05:58:34 am
Post by: Greiger on June 30, 2014, 11:42:18 am
When the system was designed there was no form of near instant communication, and they are permitted to vote how they wish when they actually get to the place where the actual official EC members votes are tallied. It was some kind of system to allow for them to adapt to sudden changes in situation during travel time. In the modern era, that's just absurd and needs abolished.
Post by: Culise on June 30, 2014, 12:11:49 pm
The problem with voting for a third party is that even if they somehow manage to win a popular vote, and not just be a spoiler vote that increases the chances of the guy you LEAST want to get into office, even for a few states, I don't see any reason why the electoral college wouldn't vote republican or democrat anyway. They have absolutely nothing that requires them to vote the way the people want them to, except for maybe some bad public opinion after the fact that they just changed your vote for you as surely as if you chose another bubble to fill in. And there's nothing you can do about it for 4 years neener neener.Yes, faithless electors are theoretically a thing. That said, 29 states already have laws that punish them after the fact, and some of these also invalidate a faithless elector's vote (which renders it largely ceremonial). Moreover, they're more a theory than a reality, and have been such since the 19th century. Since the year 1900, there have been precisely nine such faithless electors (ten, if you count Illinois' brief snafu in 1984): of these, three were actually for third-party candidates (States' Rights, Libertarian, and American Independent) in total, two were likely errors (including accidentally voting the vice-president candidate for president and vice versa), and still others were likely protest votes (a no-vote to protest D.C.'s lack of representation; a vote for a judge and senator not even in the presidential race). Also, the last time a third party successfully took a state (multiple states, actually) in 1968, the only faithless elector broke in favour of the third-party candidate even when they were supposed to be voting Republican. In 1984, when the Democratic results were pretty close to a third-party status, the only state Mondale took didn't break faith for the sake of popularity, either.
When the system was designed there was no form of near instant communication, and they are permitted to vote how they wish when they actually get to the place where the actual official EC members votes are tallied. It was some kind of system to allow for them to adapt to sudden changes in situation during travel time. In the modern era, that's just absurd and needs abolished.
I suppose that essentially, the question isn't so much why wouldn't an elector break faith, but rather why would they break faith? It costs them nothing to keep faith and vote for a third party, and in many states, it would cost them quite a bit to do otherwise. There are plenty of issues with the voting system that block third parties and need to be addressed; Electoral College reform, though significant in its own right, is not one of these.
Post by: Cheeetar on June 30, 2014, 12:19:40 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on June 30, 2014, 12:35:06 pm
Post by: Duuvian on June 30, 2014, 04:37:09 pm
That poll was kind of limited too.
Post by: Eagle_eye on July 01, 2014, 10:27:48 pm
Or that. Just don't allow your choices to be constrained. It's all a mind game. It only works because we allow it.
The problem is that it only works because we allow it. Protest voting on an individual level is actively harmful, in that it increases the odds of the Republicans winning, and isn't going to get anyone else to make a protest vote. It's like playing Prisoner's dilemma with a bunch of people who don't know that this isn't the optimal outcome.
Post by: SalmonGod on July 01, 2014, 11:25:57 pm
Or that. Just don't allow your choices to be constrained. It's all a mind game. It only works because we allow it.
The problem is that it only works because we allow it. Protest voting on an individual level is actively harmful, in that it increases the odds of the Republicans winning, and isn't going to get anyone else to make a protest vote. It's like playing Prisoner's dilemma with a bunch of people who don't know that this isn't the optimal outcome.
It may be most harmful in the short term, but I believe that continuing as we are is most harmful in the long term.
The Republicans are worse, but both are still horrible. And it's not just about enduring a steady level of horribleness under the Democrats. Things continue getting worse no matter which side is dominant. Democrats and Republicans alike continue to support rising economic inequality, environmental destruction, and the expansion the prison-industrial militarized police surveillance state. Our rights continue to be chipped away. The end result we're looking at is the same, except one side just pushes for it a little more aggressively.
I know that social causes are important and the Republican stances on them are really scary, but Democrats hurt our ability to be activists for those causes too. Police in the U.S. are notorious for aggression towards any left-wing activism (and I'm NOT only referencing Occupy here), so Democrats are hurting social causes too when they grant law enforcement greater surveillance and impunity. And the evils of bigotry will pale in comparison to the crushing poverty and ecosystem collapse we face in our lifetimes. For fucks sake, there are projections that the oceans will be nearly devoid of life before my kids are middle-aged.
And I've only witnessed a handful of people actually voice support for either of the two parties in the last few years. Almost everybody hates them both and is fed up, but believes that they have no choice but to hold on to tactical voting. I think it's an awareness problem. Everyone's too paranoid that there aren't enough people ready to abandon this facade, so they don't make significant gestures to display their readiness. I think any noticeable drop in support for them will have a cascading effect. But somebody has to take the first step.
And people on the right are fed up with Republicans, too. I never saw evidence of a single person who actually liked Romney outside of footage of his own support rallys. Every single person I spoke with or heard of who was voting for him was for the sole reason of opposing Obama, and were prepared to fight Romney on most of the stuff he wanted to do after electing him. It may not be to the same extent, but I believe they're acting on the same dilemma as the left.
Post by: WealthyRadish on July 02, 2014, 01:05:14 am
Post by: Angle on July 02, 2014, 01:06:12 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 02, 2014, 01:56:20 am
Post by: SalmonGod on July 02, 2014, 05:19:26 pm
Voting for a third party is still rather foolish, though. It won't have much effect. What we need to do is put additional effort into circumventing the current status quo. I'm not entirely sure how best to do that, though I have a number of ideas.
I agree, if you mean what I think you do about circumventing the status quo. I absolutely promote measures to operate outside of existing establishments, and plant the seeds of new ones that can grow to replace them. But if voting in third parties is unrealistic, then convincing people to abandon the establishment entirely is a fairytale. Might as well do both. We still have to cope with the present while building the future, anyway.
Post by: Angle on July 02, 2014, 05:26:56 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on July 02, 2014, 05:31:35 pm
Post by: Angle on July 02, 2014, 05:38:01 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on July 02, 2014, 05:46:38 pm
Post by: Angle on July 02, 2014, 05:48:50 pm
...I wonder if you could sue them over that...
Post by: WillowLuman on July 02, 2014, 05:55:36 pm
Post by: SealyStar on July 02, 2014, 08:11:31 pm
Post by: Helgoland on July 02, 2014, 08:31:55 pm
Post by: palsch on July 03, 2014, 06:56:58 am
Fun fact: In my district, my vote literally doesn't count, anyway. It's super-hardcore Republican-land here, so even by tactical voting standards, it doesn't matter whether I vote Democrat or not. In 2012, I wrote in Jill Stein, and I know a couple other people that did as well. When I looked at the voting results for my district, it showed 0 votes for Jill Stein. But IIRC, it showed votes for right-wing third party write-ins...What state? Some states require you register to be a valid write-in candidate before the election. There were seven states where she wasn't on the ballot or a valid write-in candidate. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein_presidential_campaign,_2012#Ballot_status)
Post by: penguinofhonor on July 03, 2014, 07:58:52 am
Post by: XXSockXX on July 03, 2014, 08:00:18 am
Post by: Arx on July 03, 2014, 12:37:30 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on July 03, 2014, 04:00:40 pm
Fun fact: In my district, my vote literally doesn't count, anyway. It's super-hardcore Republican-land here, so even by tactical voting standards, it doesn't matter whether I vote Democrat or not. In 2012, I wrote in Jill Stein, and I know a couple other people that did as well. When I looked at the voting results for my district, it showed 0 votes for Jill Stein. But IIRC, it showed votes for right-wing third party write-ins...What state? Some states require you register to be a valid write-in candidate before the election. There were seven states where she wasn't on the ballot or a valid write-in candidate. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jill_Stein_presidential_campaign,_2012#Ballot_status)
Indiana. According to that graph, it looks like she should have been a valid write-in.
Also was that 0 votes or 0% of the vote, (which might make sense as a rounded down number in a big state with only a dozen of write-ins)?
It was definitely 0 votes.
Post by: palsch on July 03, 2014, 04:18:08 pm
Only other vague excuse I can think of is if it was a postal ballot and so not counted in the initial results but then added in before the final totals were certified.
Other than that I did find this (http://votesocialism.com/when-every-vote-doesnt-count-in-hartford/) about similar complaints and an attempt at legal action in Connecticut. Not dated and can't see if anything came of it though.
Post by: SalmonGod on July 03, 2014, 05:13:59 pm
Here is where I was looking when I noticed this before. (http://www.co.hendricks.in.us/vrweb/election1.htm) Took me a while to find it again (mostly due to a significant web-detour). I think I checked less than a week after the election, and don't remember seeing the Write-In count listed. The General Write-In Tally definitely wasn't there. I thought for sure I remembered seeing Jill Stein's name with a big fat 0 next to it. But I just have to assume that's how my memory decided to file the event away after thinking: 'bothered to list votes for Libertarian candidate, but not the other major third party'.
So yeah... Stein apparently got 18 votes in my county.
The Detour: Randomly stumbled upon the knowledge that a high school classmate of mine, also the wrestler who beat me out for varsity position my Junior and Senior years (he was a state competitor), married a major first-season competitor on America's Next Top Model and still lives here.
Post by: notquitethere on July 04, 2014, 05:12:07 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 05, 2014, 04:50:15 pm
Quote from: Political Values
Progressivism 67.5
Socialism 12.5
Tenderness 43.75
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as an anarchist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible radical hereditarian with an established worldview.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
The fuck is a sensible radical hereditarian?
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 04:58:20 pm
Quote from: Political Values
Progressivism 92.5Ultro progressive reporting in.
Socialism 62.5
Tenderness 46.875
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible realistic egalitarian with many strong convictions.
Answered it pretending to be an American, which only really affected my military spending answer.
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 05:00:56 pm
Quote
Progressivism 65Ooh, look, I'm categorized as a terrible person.
Socialism 31.25
Tenderness 25
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a nihilist. It appears that you are distrustful towards religion, and have an indifferent and uncompassionate attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a libertarian.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a uncompromising radical centrist with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 05:01:51 pm
Post by: martinuzz on August 05, 2014, 05:05:18 pm
Solid liberal on that test.
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 05:07:33 pm
But Remuthra, you are a terrible person.I do not deny that :P.
Post by: Lagslayer on August 05, 2014, 05:08:11 pm
The fuck is a sensible radical hereditarian?Wikipedia entry. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereditarianism)
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on August 05, 2014, 05:14:06 pm
Quote from: Political Values
Progressivism 75
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 40.625
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate principled egalitarian with few strong convictions.
Eh on the first paragraph, but I like to think that the last two are accurate.
Post by: Glloyd on August 05, 2014, 05:17:16 pm
Quote
Political Values
Progressivism 95
Socialism 100
Tenderness 59.375
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate realistic egalitarian with an established worldview.
Not really surprised at all about that, except for how tender I am. However, the paragraphs describe me pretty well, except for the fact that I'm a Socialist, not a Communist. Also, I actually aim to become a university professor. You got me, online quiz.
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 05, 2014, 05:18:32 pm
Nice. Now what about being radically sensible, or sensibly radical?The fuck is a sensible radical hereditarian?Wikipedia entry. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereditarianism)
Socialism 100THE MACHINE CANNOT TURN IF THE GEARS FLY THE COMMUNIST FLAG
GLLOYD SHALL LEAD THE PROLETARIAT
BEWARE!
Post by: Descan on August 05, 2014, 05:25:16 pm
Quote
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled egalitarian with an established worldview.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Hm. The Journalist part quite surprised me, but otherwise it makes sense.
Honestly I was expecting tenderness to be... well, I don't really know. I couldn't parse which questions were asking about tenderness so I don't know what "tenderness" means.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 05, 2014, 05:28:28 pm
Post by: Glloyd on August 05, 2014, 05:33:12 pm
Socialism 100THE MACHINE CANNOT TURN IF THE GEARS FLY THE COMMUNIST FLAG
GLLOYD SHALL LEAD THE PROLETARIAT
BEWARE!
Follow me comrades! Forward, unto the socialist utopia! Workers of Bay12, unite! ;)
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on August 05, 2014, 05:35:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Some of these things are a little off, but I approve.
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 05:35:32 pm
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 05:37:06 pm
Tenderness is loosely correlated with "morality". High tenderness means you want to help the poor, and low tenderness means you want to sterilize the disabled.What's with judging people for doing fun stuff Dx
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 05:38:08 pm
Seriously, what do people have against human experimentation?Tenderness is loosely correlated with "morality". High tenderness means you want to help the poor, and low tenderness means you want to sterilize the disabled.What's with judging people for doing fun stuff Dx
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 05:39:23 pm
You can truly call it that if you perform it upon the disabled?Seriously, what do people have against human experimentation?Tenderness is loosely correlated with "morality". High tenderness means you want to help the poor, and low tenderness means you want to sterilize the disabled.What's with judging people for doing fun stuff Dx
Post by: Cheeetar on August 05, 2014, 05:42:25 pm
Quote
Progressivism 92.5
Socialism 100
Tenderness 46.875
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible realistic egalitarian with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Post by: Descan on August 05, 2014, 05:44:07 pm
But the ones about breeding or the disabled I was "strongly disagree" so... :V
If they're saying that *any* human augmentation is bad and I should feel bad, then they're a bunch of cocks.
Edit: @Cheetar: Yes, that's what I am saying exactly, about transhumanism lowering tenderness, despite my transhumanism being as much *about* tenderness as anything else, wanting to help everyone, yeah.
Post by: martinuzz on August 05, 2014, 05:45:10 pm
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general. Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist. To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate radical centrist with several strong convictions. |
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 05:45:27 pm
Post by: Helgoland on August 05, 2014, 05:46:27 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
NINJAEDIT: Dutch, what the hell?
Post by: Glloyd on August 05, 2014, 05:48:21 pm
Hrm. It seems supporting transhumanism lowered my tenderness.
I also supported transhumanism and got dinged for it. Because apparently it's not tender. Even though I answered strongly disagree to the eugenics questions. I think it is tender in its own way, because it's improving humanity. At least in my eyes.
Also:
Quote
Socialism 100
Another comrade joins the party!
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 05:51:49 pm
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 05:52:32 pm
But you miss the point there. The disabilities would ruin the results. No, we use any illicit third children to run experiments, and let the disabled die off for the betterment of the gene pool.You can truly call it that if you perform it upon the disabled?Seriously, what do people have against human experimentation?Tenderness is loosely correlated with "morality". High tenderness means you want to help the poor, and low tenderness means you want to sterilize the disabled.What's with judging people for doing fun stuff Dx
_______________
The biggest problem with society-improving systems such as population control or human artificial selection is that the current collective human psychology is incompatible with these things. (The second problem is that one can't trust humans to actually select for traits which better the gene pool, which is why the Nazis couldn't eugenics.) Humanity is still dominated by genetic self-interest.
Post by: Descan on August 05, 2014, 05:55:36 pm
The biggest problem with eugenics is not that they don't work, is that to make them work you have to commit stellar levels of evil, coercion and murder, to achieve even a small thing.
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 05:57:37 pm
Post by: Helgoland on August 05, 2014, 06:01:06 pm
Post by: Descan on August 05, 2014, 06:03:43 pm
and i don't even know what Dutchling is asking, if he's not just being Dutching here.
Post by: Dutchling on August 05, 2014, 06:04:14 pm
Too many people would see it as eugenics regardless.
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 06:04:50 pm
I don't want eugenics or "artificial human selection" or anything like that, I want basically sci-fi style genetic modification and mechanical/nano-mechanical augmentation of the adult human body according to the wishes of the human being augmented. :VThat's a result of the current societal attitudes. If people would agree collectively to work towards a common genetic goal, no violence would be necessary. As it is, the fact that implementing population controls would require harsh measures is the very thing that makes it impractical. Hence, I look to extraplanetary development as the best way to ensure the long-term survival of civilization.
The biggest problem with eugenics is not that they don't work, is that to make them work you have to commit stellar levels of evil, coercion and murder, to achieve even a small thing.
Post by: Descan on August 05, 2014, 06:07:28 pm
Post by: Helgoland on August 05, 2014, 06:07:57 pm
I don't see that ever happening in Europe.It would be - I was kidding...
Too many people would see it as eugenics regardless.
Post by: Lagslayer on August 05, 2014, 07:15:57 pm
Post by: Culise on August 05, 2014, 07:19:05 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on August 05, 2014, 08:02:01 pm
Quote
28) The greatest threats to our country have come from foreign ideas and agitators.*checks position on map*
*checks history books*
Hmmm, do I answer the letter or the spirit of the question?
Post by: FearfulJesuit on August 05, 2014, 08:41:01 pm
Quote
Progressivism 70
Socialism 43.75
Tenderness 75
Your test scores indicate that you are a tender-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a compassionate and sympathetic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear neither committedly capitalist nor socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a uncompromising principled egalitarian with few strong convictions.
Post by: Tawa on August 05, 2014, 09:33:44 pm
Quote from: Political Values
Progressivism 72.5
Socialism 68.75
Tenderness 40.625
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled egalitarian with few strong convictions.
Roughly what I expected.
Maybe.
I guess I'm a little over half-commie.
QuoteYour test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled egalitarian with an established worldview.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Comrade!
Or something.
Post by: Cheeetar on August 05, 2014, 09:38:14 pm
Post by: Lyeos on August 05, 2014, 09:39:26 pm
Quote
There.
Progressivism 40
Socialism 18.75
Tenderness 43.75
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded cultural centrist; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a traditionalist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a uncompromising radical centrist with few strong convictions.
I fixed the thing.
Mostly.
Post by: SalmonGod on August 05, 2014, 09:50:14 pm
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 50
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a journalist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate principled egalitarian with many strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Post by: Lagslayer on August 05, 2014, 09:56:02 pm
Post by: uber pye on August 05, 2014, 10:14:18 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
i did not know there was such thing as a radical centrist
Post by: Remuthra on August 05, 2014, 10:17:30 pm
"BE MODERATE OR YOU DIE!"Spoiler (click to show/hide)
i did not know there was such thing as a radical centrist
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 05, 2014, 10:19:26 pm
MSH, quick request: Every time you change the title, can you change the OP to have the link to the test the title references? Trawling through the thread isn't fun :ISorry, but I can't be bothered to maintain that. Also, we did this quiz before.
i did not know there was such thing as a radical centristhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_center_%28politics%29
Post by: WillowLuman on August 05, 2014, 11:40:01 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 05, 2014, 11:50:10 pm
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on August 06, 2014, 07:01:20 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I... can live with that result, honestly.
And GreatOrder, if you're still looking for the quiz: http://slackhalla.org/~demise/test/socialattitude.php
Post by: notquitethere on August 06, 2014, 08:28:15 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
A lot of the time I agree with the sentiment of a statement, but disagree strongly with the wording, so I put down neutral or mildly agree/disagree but it doesn't quite reflect my views.
Post by: penguinofhonor on August 06, 2014, 08:34:43 am
Socialism: 100
Tenderness: 50
2ultraliberal4u
Post by: Haspen on August 06, 2014, 08:36:03 am
Socialism: 56.25
Tenderness: 28.125
"Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded cultural centrist; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear neither committedly capitalist nor socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a liberal."
And apparently I'm sensible realistic egalitarian?
Post by: Boksi on August 06, 2014, 08:48:43 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Helgoland on August 06, 2014, 10:01:10 am
Post by: LordSlowpoke on August 06, 2014, 10:05:10 am
if we're working philospohy, socialism assumes all beings have the same amount of agency, under the assumption that material goods equal ability to influence things
and i think agency was important for humanism but then i know fuckall about reality
Post by: Arx on August 06, 2014, 01:03:05 pm
Quote
Progressivism 72.5
Socialism 18.75
Tenderness 90.625
Your test scores indicate that you are a very tender-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with an animal rights activist. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a compassionate and sympathetic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a libertarian.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible realistic egalitarian with several strong convictions.
Tolerant towards religion, that's me. And sensible! I like being sensible.
Post by: wobbly on August 06, 2014, 02:03:56 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The religion bit is interesting, when you read the questions, just about anyone who is not a religious fanatic is going to come up with: skeptical towards religion. Do the quiz writers believe you don't have beliefs if your not ramming them down everyone else's throat?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 06, 2014, 02:12:05 pm
Post by: Mr. Strange on August 06, 2014, 04:00:59 pm
Quote
Political Values
Progressivism 80
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 56.25
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a considerate principled egalitarian with several strong convictions.
Post by: TinFoilTopHat on August 08, 2014, 01:16:02 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
EDIT: also this test seems vaguely biased towards socialism, but i could be wrong.
Post by: Descan on August 08, 2014, 01:18:42 am
It's fairly widespread.
Post by: Angle on August 08, 2014, 01:25:27 am
Post by: Alev on August 08, 2014, 01:44:43 am
Quote
Political Values
Progressivism 80
Socialism 93.75
Tenderness 71.875
Your test scores indicate that you are a tender-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are tolerant towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled egalitarian with several strong convictions.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Post by: Noel.se on August 08, 2014, 07:32:36 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Molly Renata on August 08, 2014, 08:36:22 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
That's what I got. Seems to fit what people say about me :V
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 08, 2014, 05:54:14 pm
Quote
Progressivism 100
Socialism 100
Tenderness 56.25
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a balanced attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a uncompromising realistic egalitarian with a firmly established worldview.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Sounds more or less right, although I'm rather skeptical of the whole stateless society part of communism.
Post by: GreatJustice on August 09, 2014, 10:16:45 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Seems close enough.
Post by: alexandertnt on August 09, 2014, 09:05:59 pm
Quote
Progressivism 100
Socialism 100
Tenderness 56.25
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a generally optimistic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear communist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible idealistic egalitarian with an established worldview.
Post by: Cthulhu on August 10, 2014, 07:22:42 am
Post by: SalmonGod on August 11, 2014, 01:20:49 am
Post by: aenri on August 11, 2014, 12:46:36 pm
Socialism 6.25
Tenderness 21.875
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded cultural centrist; this is the political profile one might associate with a nihilist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear laissez-faire capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as an anarchist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled hereditarian with many strong convictions.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SalmonGod on August 11, 2014, 04:54:09 pm
Post by: notquitethere on August 11, 2014, 05:14:15 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 11, 2014, 07:25:05 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SalmonGod on August 11, 2014, 07:50:46 pm
It's also depressing in general how few non-authoritarian figures are portrayed.
Post by: Lyeos on August 11, 2014, 08:10:50 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Glloyd on August 11, 2014, 08:26:45 pm
(http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-9.75&soc=-8.21)
Post by: TD1 on August 11, 2014, 08:30:28 pm
Also, this is American, yes? So right is left, and left is right,....or something?
Post by: Lagslayer on August 11, 2014, 08:39:44 pm
Post by: alexandertnt on August 11, 2014, 08:55:42 pm
Post by: Worldmaster27 on August 11, 2014, 09:04:09 pm
I still say that seems like a really BS test. There are no neutral choices, and they all seem to try and pigeonhole you into very specific archetypes.+1 Neutral options would be lovely.
In any case...
(http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-1.75&soc=-1.33)
Post by: SalmonGod on August 11, 2014, 09:16:32 pm
(http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-8.25&soc=-8.00)
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 11, 2014, 09:32:36 pm
I like how the difference between Obama and Romney is a notch and a half on the authoritarian axis :PIt's a tenet of American democracy that both choice are essentially the same. Except they disagree on gay marriage and guns. A notch and a half.
I can call you a Nazi if you want.Needs to be way more authoritarian to go full hitler.
2extremist4U LW!Pleb tier extremism
You're not even Gandhi
Post by: BadLemonsXI on August 11, 2014, 09:42:59 pm
Spoiler: INTJ what ever that means (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cthulhu on August 11, 2014, 09:51:25 pm
Quote
Ultimately, private property should be abolished and complete socialism introduced.
These two statements do not immediately follow each other and I can't answer them both at the same time. There are a lot of statements like that in that test.
Code: [Select]
Progressivism 80
Socialism 75
Tenderness 25
Your test scores indicate that you are a tough-minded progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a liberated atheist. It appears that you are distrustful towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled centrist with several strong convictions.
As for ObabO (http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/082809/coffee-vs-my-president.gif)
Come on dudes, extremism is in your actions, not your beliefs! When was the last time you blew something up?
Post by: Lyeos on August 11, 2014, 09:55:31 pm
Come on dudes, extremism is in your actions, not your beliefs! When was the last time you blew something up?A few weeks ago.
As for BadLemons...
Here. (http://www.politicalcompass.org/test)
Post by: SomeStupidGuy on August 11, 2014, 10:05:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It'd be a nice change of pace if one of these days, one of these quizzes called me a full-on neo-conservative(then of course, I would scream in horror as I look in the nearest mirror to find that my face is suddenly that of Ronald Reagan, that's usually how that nightmare goes :v)...
Post by: BadLemonsXI on August 11, 2014, 10:17:35 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Alev on August 11, 2014, 10:27:44 pm
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 11, 2014, 10:37:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
A little bit surprised. I expected to be all the way to the left, and only moderately south of center. I suppose their conflation of authoritarianism and intolerance explains the second one.
Post by: Alev on August 11, 2014, 10:40:40 pm
http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-5.25&soc=-2.36, too lazy to find out why the image was broken.Edit: meant to modify.
Post by: Baffler on August 11, 2014, 10:41:04 pm
Y'all are a buncha dang hippies compared to me. It's probably because of my answers concerning religion and the death penalty.
Post by: BadLemonsXI on August 11, 2014, 10:42:43 pm
I just right clicked on the broken image and clicked on 'open image in new tab' and I could see it.http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-5.25&soc=-2.36, too lazy to find out why the image was broken.Edit: meant to modify.
Post by: Alev on August 11, 2014, 10:42:59 pm
(http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=-5.62&soc=-2.62)It's like we're connected.
Y'all are a buncha dang hippies compared to me. It's probably because of my answers concerning religion and the death penalty.
I kid.
Nevermind, I am more right than you by about a notch.
Post by: Alev on August 11, 2014, 10:43:19 pm
I'm on mobile.I just right clicked on the broken image and clicked on 'open image in new tab' and I could see it.http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-5.25&soc=-2.36, too lazy to find out why the image was broken.Edit: meant to modify.
Post by: Graknorke on August 13, 2014, 06:57:37 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Some of those questions were uncomfortable to answer. Since they don't really give enough detail to answer properly.
Post by: Dutchling on August 13, 2014, 07:21:46 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: LordSlowpoke on August 13, 2014, 07:49:18 am
Spoiler: well this is surprising (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheDarkStar on August 13, 2014, 09:22:24 am
Spoiler: And another dot in the same place! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Gnorm on August 13, 2014, 10:31:52 am
Spoiler: Well that's that (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutchling on August 13, 2014, 10:32:50 am
Post by: Lyeos on August 13, 2014, 10:33:44 am
Almost brother!This is why I usually avoid General Discussion threads.Spoiler: Well that's that (click to show/hide)
Post by: Graknorke on August 13, 2014, 10:48:37 am
Hang on I'm sure I left my death squad uniform around here somewhere...This is why I usually avoid General Discussion threads.Spoiler: Well that's that (click to show/hide)
Post by: Guardian G.I. on August 13, 2014, 10:55:57 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The Political Compass test isn't expansive enough, in my opinion.
Post by: Amuys on August 13, 2014, 11:22:23 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on August 13, 2014, 12:08:10 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Angle on August 13, 2014, 12:21:31 pm
Quote
Progressivism 95
Socialism 87.5
Tenderness 53.125
Your test scores indicate that you are an open-minded ultra-progressive; this is the political profile one might associate with a university professor. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.
Your attitudes towards economics appear socialist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a humanist.
To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a sensible principled egalitarian with an established worldview.
This concludes our analysis; we hope you found your results accurate, useful, and interesting.
Sounds about right. Though now I think I may have taken the wrong test.
Post by: Mr. Strange on August 13, 2014, 03:21:53 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on August 13, 2014, 03:55:37 pm
Apparently I'm an authoritarian. Like, when did that happen? :P
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 13, 2014, 04:37:37 pm
Yeah.When you became a filthy statist shill? Remove statist from the premises, Weird Al wills it.
Apparently I'm an authoritarian. Like, when did that happen? :P
Post by: TD1 on August 13, 2014, 04:43:24 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 13, 2014, 05:24:12 pm
Says the one who has the Spanish Inquisition dorfified in his avatar, heh.They fight for UNEXPECTED FREEDOM.
Post by: MaximumZero on August 13, 2014, 07:21:25 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SalmonGod on August 13, 2014, 07:33:16 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Activate drift!
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 13, 2014, 07:51:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Activate drift!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SalmonGod on August 13, 2014, 08:00:32 pm
Post by: WealthyRadish on August 13, 2014, 10:15:05 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Just kidding.
Though the test is definitely biased in its wording towards the left/libertarian, and I'm curious where the logic comes from for some of these questions (like how an opinion on religion is supposed to equate to an opinion on social security).
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 13, 2014, 10:27:25 pm
Post by: notquitethere on August 14, 2014, 04:57:07 am
Post by: BlindKitty on August 14, 2014, 06:55:54 am
Yeah, it's not even worth making a link out of it. This is about as unbiased as Soviet propaganda and somewhat American oriented, too (I've not since one change in politics where I live to happen due to any counter-terrorism, for example). OK, time to find some other tests. ;)
Post by: Jelle on August 14, 2014, 07:12:01 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Fairly average it seems, at least for this forum.
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 14, 2014, 10:40:41 am
It's designed to make people who actually progressives or socialists think they should associate with the libertarian party, yeah.The definition of a libertarian is either a follower of libertarianism or a person who advocates civil liberty, making the latter definition the direct opposite of authoritarianism. Being left libertarian in this compass would probably make you a social democrat or a green whereas those around the centre right libertarian are libertarians of the former definition.
Post by: Dutchling on August 14, 2014, 10:46:50 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Itnetlolor on August 17, 2014, 09:47:53 pm
Aquarius + Rat = Meerkat (http://www.primalastrology.com/meerkat.html)
Seems pretty accurate, all things considered.
Post by: penguinofhonor on August 17, 2014, 09:57:42 pm
The description seems about as inaccurate as any other astrology thing I've read.
Post by: TD1 on August 17, 2014, 10:03:36 pm
http://www.primalastrology.com/lemming.html
Post by: SealyStar on August 17, 2014, 10:26:08 pm
I'm just circling waiting for y'all to die~
Post by: Baffler on August 17, 2014, 10:32:03 pm
I've never heard of my spirit animal before today. I take it this isn't a good sign.
Post by: Orange Wizard on August 17, 2014, 10:37:55 pm
Post by: Culise on August 17, 2014, 10:45:49 pm
Post by: NAV on August 17, 2014, 10:47:16 pm
Doesn't seem accurate at all.
Quote
After they have cooled down, though, don’t expect a Piranha to apologize for their behavior. Instead they will walk away blaming you for the whole event.WRONG! I'M CANADIAN. I APOLOGIZE ALL THE TIME.
Post by: Alev on August 17, 2014, 10:49:54 pm
Leo + Pig = Quetzal.Do you even quetzal?
I've never heard of my spirit animal before today. I take it this isn't a good sign.
HEIL QUETZALCOATL! HEIL QUETZALCOATL!
Post by: Darvi on August 17, 2014, 11:19:36 pm
I'M A SHAAARK
SUCK MY DIIIIIICK
I'M A SHAAAAARK
Post by: Molly Renata on August 18, 2014, 12:17:59 am
Aries + Monkey = Gorilla (http://www.primalastrology.com/gorilla.html).
....
It's really no wonder I don't place much stock in this astrology stuff. Less than half of the stuff on that page actually applies to me...
Post by: Jelle on August 18, 2014, 01:16:25 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 18, 2014, 02:26:20 am
SUN BEAR
ALL SHALL KNOW FEAR AS I TEAR THEM LIMB FROM LIMB WITH CLAWS OF PURE PLASMA!
Post by: notquitethere on August 18, 2014, 02:31:43 am
I took the political compass test and the spirit animal one. Apparently I'm Aardvark (http://www.primalastrology.com/aardvark.html) Gandhi.That's the trouble with the Compass, everyone is Gandhi.
Post by: Guardian G.I. on August 18, 2014, 02:40:51 am
Quote
In fact, most people born under this sign are highly organized and are the first to volunteer their help for a friend or family member’s project.I'm anything but highly organized and I don't like to volunteer. :-\
The rest is somewhat accurate.
Post by: smjjames on August 18, 2014, 02:44:52 am
While I am a Star Trek fan, I don't know Klingon and I do like science fiction and science. Definetly not into music though.
I don't care for the astrology stuff though.
Post by: Remuthra on August 18, 2014, 07:57:23 am
EDIT:
Quote
They are usually very kind and gentle peopleHehehe.
Post by: Criptfeind on August 18, 2014, 08:22:19 am
There are like maybe two sentences on that page that are not exactly opposite from what I really am. Oh well.
Post by: Tawa on August 18, 2014, 12:10:33 pm
Oh god.
Quote from: Famous Porcupines
Vladimir Putin (10/7/1952)I never knew that Vladimir Putin was a porcupine!
Friedrich Nietzsche (10/15/1844)
I can only assume I'm the reincarnation of a commie who likes having staring contests with abysses.
Post by: MaximumZero on August 18, 2014, 12:11:55 pm
What's that, website, you know me?
Quote
shy away from confrontation whenever possible.
...
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 18, 2014, 12:27:33 pm
Quote
Hippos have a good work ethic
That is the least true thing that anyone has ever said about me, and I've been called a robot.
Post by: Greiger on August 18, 2014, 12:29:55 pm
Least I'm not a pig. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoRalobIcME)
Post by: Spehss _ on August 18, 2014, 12:55:42 pm
Post by: Arx on August 18, 2014, 01:15:58 pm
Also, I definitely struggle with mastering my emotions. Yupyup. I definitely have difficulty acquiring a clinical perspective on things. So true.
Post by: WillowLuman on August 18, 2014, 01:23:44 pm
Exactly half of the stuff on that page applies to me.
Post by: Spehss _ on August 18, 2014, 01:59:59 pm
Seems accurate.
Post by: Darvi on August 18, 2014, 02:07:14 pm
Post by: Spehss _ on August 18, 2014, 02:37:55 pm
/me shoves Spehss off a cliff and makes a documentary out of it.What would a shark be doing on the cliff though? Cliffs ain't water, yo.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on August 18, 2014, 02:57:27 pm
Post by: Graknorke on August 18, 2014, 04:34:22 pm
Wrong at its core, and so in everything based off that.
Come on they could at least cold read right.
Post by: Cheeetar on August 18, 2014, 05:36:24 pm
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 18, 2014, 06:13:33 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Remuthra on August 18, 2014, 06:19:08 pm
Post by: Graknorke on August 18, 2014, 06:20:33 pm
Both of them were easily justified as not being tensions by the fact that I gave my opinion, which is the best I can. I didn't realise I was being tested as the fountain of all objective truths.
Post by: Remuthra on August 18, 2014, 06:22:13 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on August 18, 2014, 06:37:19 pm
Spoiler: Here are my tensions and my response (click to show/hide)
All in all, I think poor wording, a lack of differentiation between the individual and society, and overly complex questions make this test fairly poor in my regard.
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 18, 2014, 06:42:42 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on August 18, 2014, 06:45:06 pm
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 18, 2014, 06:49:39 pm
Post by: Remuthra on August 18, 2014, 06:51:12 pm
Well, ok, but now you're using words in ways that most other people don't. For the vast majority of people, "I don't like that" and "That is evil" are not synonymous.Au contraire.
Post by: BadLemonsXI on August 18, 2014, 06:51:46 pm
Libra+Pig=Marmot, apparently. At least I'm not hoary.Same here I got the Marmot (http://www.primalastrology.com/marmot.html) too.
What's that, website, you know me?Quoteshy away from confrontation whenever possible....
Post by: Criptfeind on August 18, 2014, 06:55:48 pm
Well, ok, but now you're using words in ways that most other people don't. For the vast majority of people, "I don't like that" and "That is evil" are not synonymous.
True. But I'm just saying that when a vast majority of people say something is evil, that thing is evil.
Edit: When talking about subjective morality and so long as their logic is sound. Obviously when most people say something is evil they mean that what it causes or what causes it is evil. If they are wrong about what it causes or what causes it, then I would say they are wrong about it being evil.
Post by: alexandertnt on August 18, 2014, 11:18:02 pm
I interperated "mans ability to do evil" as "man's ability to be real dicks" though, diddn't really think that it meant anything objective. I suppose genocide could technically be justified and non-evil (in some hypothetical extreme situation, like saving the entire human race or something) but all to often it's just some powerful asshole/assholes acting on their personal preduces.
Post by: Graknorke on August 19, 2014, 04:36:33 am
The other was a conflict between "There is no objective truth" and "The holocaust happened roughly as the history books say."
Which is also a non-conflict, because the only judgement it is reasonable for me to make is that the latter is true, given that I don't know an awful lot about the subject from the standpoint of examining it like a historian would.
Post by: notquitethere on August 19, 2014, 06:26:34 am
Post by: Helgoland on August 19, 2014, 09:23:22 am
I answered yes, but I don't think that's something I'd say in public where I live. Poorly worded, indeed
E: One tension.
Quote
There are no objective moral standards; moral judgements are merely an expression of the values of particular culturesThose aren't contradictory!
Acts of genocide stand as a testament to man's ability to do great evil.
Post by: Culise on August 19, 2014, 09:55:29 am
Spoiler: Tension, apprehension, and dissension have begun. (click to show/hide)
Amusing, but ultimately rather strongly biased to their particular viewpoints. For a people so notionally proud of encompassing a wide range of philosophical viewpoints, they seem to take a very narrow-minded approach to many things, neglecting many nuances in the process.
Post by: notquitethere on August 19, 2014, 10:13:53 am
Notionally, the "testament of man's ability to do great evil" is fundamentally subjective to me - that is to say, I believe that acts of genocide are evil. This does not extrapolate necessarily to the values of particular cultures. As noted, it can be seen in other cultures as not evil, for instance, in the case where such a culture accepts as postulate that said ethnic group is of significant concern, euphemistically speaking, or that it is necessary to remove by force said ethnic group from a region to ensure greater peace for the majority (i.e., a strict utilitarian standpoint). That said, such acts are not things that I can condone.But genocide is wrong and that's not a fact purely subjective to just you but a feature of the world and how we use the words 'wrong' and 'genocide'. People in a culture may come to think it's right (this has been historically common), but they're wrong.
The holocaust is an historical reality, taking place more or less as the history books reportThis is incoherent. If it is a fact that the holocaust took place much as described in the history books, then it is true that is took place much as described.
Fact and truth are not the same thing. Truth is a metaphysical concept; the Holocaust is the realm of facts - that is to say, it was an objectively-observed phenomenon. There is a difference between disagreeing on a truth behind a matter, and disagreeing on the existence of that matter itself.
Post by: Dutchling on August 19, 2014, 10:19:04 am
Quote
The second world war was a just war.Well, that kinda depends on whose point of view we're talking about ...
(or not at all, depending on who you ask, of course)
Post by: Jelle on August 19, 2014, 10:19:39 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Remuthra on August 19, 2014, 10:24:11 am
Post by: Dutchling on August 19, 2014, 10:26:16 am
Maybe because at first you say that proof or evidence is irrelevant, while with the second one it suddenly is?QuoteYou disagreed that:I can't find both unreasonable? Neither is provable, both are beliefs and thus irrational.
It is quite reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing without even the possibility of evidence for its existence
But agreed that:
Atheism is a faith just like any other, because it is not possible to prove the non-existence of God
Post by: Culise on August 19, 2014, 10:34:37 am
But genocide is wrong and that's not a fact purely subjective to just you but a feature of the world and how we use the words 'wrong' and 'genocide'. People in a culture may come to think it's right (this has been historically common), but they're wrong.By your definition and mine, but from their own perspective, it's not wrong - it's not wrong to be right, insofar as they consider it to be right. That is, however, a distinction made in our distinct concepts of right and wrong and the relative or absolute natures therein, and not in itself a matter of philosophical tension between "irreconcilable" internal opinions.
This is incoherent. If it is a fact that the holocaust took place much as described in the history books, then it is true that is took place much as described.Sorry, you're entirely correct; how I put it is quite incoherent. By it, I permitted confusion between two definitions of the word "truth." Due to being on a philosophical website, I matched "truth" in its initial context with its more common philosophical use, which is far more subjective than "truth" as used to define the veracity of facts and objective occurrences. I should have been more clear on how the factual existence of the Holocaust does not have any relevance to the existence of more subjective, philosophical "truths."
Post by: Graknorke on August 19, 2014, 10:44:50 am
But genocide is wrong and that's not a fact purely subjective to just you but a feature of the world and how we use the words 'wrong' and 'genocide'. People in a culture may come to think it's right (this has been historically common), but they're wrong.But that's just like, your opinion man.
No really, I have nothing to say about that. It's obvious that you have a set view and won't be swayed from it. But what you just posted isn't any different in reasoning than, say, people who say that being gay is wrong or being of a certain religion is wrong or that couples of different race are wrong are whatever.
"It's just true." Not a real argument.
Post by: TD1 on August 19, 2014, 10:52:12 am
Post by: Jelle on August 19, 2014, 11:06:18 am
As to your last tension, atheism is based not upon the belief in no god but in the lack of belief in one.Is it though? The definition of atheism seems to vary, going from the disbelief of the existance of any deity to the belief that there is no deity. What I gather atheism as a whole encompasses both ideas, and in my experience it is usually equated to positive atheism. I suppose the question is open to interpretation as to wether it refers to positive or negative atheism.
No...if you care to note I disagreed with the first statement, implying I do consider the burden of proof important.Maybe because at first you say that proof or evidence is irrelevant, while with the second one it suddenly is?QuoteYou disagreed that:I can't find both unreasonable? Neither is provable, both are beliefs and thus irrational.
It is quite reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing without even the possibility of evidence for its existence
But agreed that:
Atheism is a faith just like any other, because it is not possible to prove the non-existence of God
Post by: Darvi on August 19, 2014, 11:08:58 am
Post by: wobbly on August 19, 2014, 11:11:47 am
Edit: I also seriously hope all these surveys are meant as light entertainment/curiousity factor, because if any of them are meant to be real research, my opinion of political/psychological sciences has just plummeted. & considering it was pretty low to start with....
Post by: Graknorke on August 19, 2014, 11:25:56 am
It's pretty straightforward, it is not reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing where there is no possibility of evidence for its existence, so it is reasonable to not believe in the existence of a thing where there is no possibility of evidence for its existence.No...if you care to note I disagreed with the first statement, implying I do consider the burden of proof important.Maybe because at first you say that proof or evidence is irrelevant, while with the second one it suddenly is?QuoteYou disagreed that:I can't find both unreasonable? Neither is provable, both are beliefs and thus irrational.
It is quite reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing without even the possibility of evidence for its existence
But agreed that:
Atheism is a faith just like any other, because it is not possible to prove the non-existence of God
Post by: Jelle on August 19, 2014, 11:47:56 am
It's pretty straightforward, it is not reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing where there is no possibility of evidence for its existence, so it is reasonable to not believe in the existence of a thing where there is no possibility of evidence for its existence.Yes I agree it is reasonable to not believe in the existence of something without proof. I also find it unreasonable to believe in the non existence of something without proof. There is a minor but very significant difference between the two things, and atheism as a whole does not differentiate between the two (either of the two standpoints is sufficient to be considered atheist).
Post by: Remuthra on August 19, 2014, 11:55:58 am
Evangelists like to mess with the term to make it easier to refute. Atheism derives from the following rationale:As to your last tension, atheism is based not upon the belief in no god but in the lack of belief in one.Is it though? The definition of atheism seems to vary, going from the disbelief of the existance of any deity to the belief that there is no deity. What I gather atheism as a whole encompasses both ideas, and in my experience it is usually equated to positive atheism. I suppose the question is open to interpretation as to wether it refers to positive or negative atheism.
The explanation which requires the fewest assumptions is the most likely to be correct (Occam's Razor). Since we cannot know something is true with absolute certainty (excepting certain constructs which are necessarily true, or at least assumed to be necessarily true to avoid absurdity, such as the principles of mathematics and logic), due to the fallibility of the senses, the most likely explanation is assumed to be correct until it is disproved. The explanation of a supernatural creator has no evidence (we live in and work with the natural world, and the supernatural - a suspension of the natural laws of the universe - is scientifically unprovable; the unfalsifiability of religion is central to its perpetuation) and there is no phenomenon which necessitates its existence. Therefore, it is unreasonable to assume a creator when there is any natural explanation. Further, for any phenomenon that does not yet have a natural explanation, it can be assumed that one will be found, because all phenomena yet found have had a natural explanation. In short, there is no need to assume a supernatural creator, so it can be said with reasonable certainty that there is none.
The idea of atheism as a positive claim simply comes from lingual acrobatics. The conclusion that there is no deity because no reason has been found to suggest there is follows the same logic as the conclusion that there are no fairies because no reason has been found to suggest fairies exist.
By the way, if this topic is going to continue it should probably be moved to its own thread, at the discretion of the OP.
Post by: notquitethere on August 19, 2014, 12:24:25 pm
By it, I permitted confusion between two definitions of the word "truth." Due to being on a philosophical website, I matched "truth" in its initial context with its more common philosophical use, which is far more subjective than "truth" as used to define the veracity of facts and objective occurrences.No, I think you'll find that (analytical) philosophers try to explicate truth in the ordinary language sense of the word: something is true if it is actually the case.
No really, I have nothing to say about that. It's obvious that you have a set view and won't be swayed from it. But what you just posted isn't any different in reasoning than, say, people who say that being gay is wrong or being of a certain religion is wrong or that couples of different race are wrong are whatever.I didn't offer an argument only because a personality test thread isn't the place for a comprehensive defence of moral realism. But here's a completely non-robust rough and ready version:
"It's just true." Not a real argument.
1- There is are actions that make lives go worse
2- What people mean by 'wrong' when tbey are being consistent are those acts that make lives worse
3- Genocide makes lives go worse definitionally
4 - Genocide is wrong
Further, but this warrants thesis-length unpacking: people who think being gay is wrong are using an inconsistent or incoherent sense of the word 'wrong'.
Post by: Helgoland on August 19, 2014, 12:40:51 pm
2- What people mean by 'wrong' when tbey are being consistent are those acts that make lives worseThere's the rub - what does 'worse' mean? I'd bet that your local minister has different ideas of what constitutes a 'worse' life than you have.
Also, atheism is usually taken to mean the belief that there is no god. But you Americans are a litte bit crazy with your definitions, so I'll just let this topic be...
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 19, 2014, 02:00:32 pm
Quote
(analytical) philosophers
Otherwise known as real philosophers. The rest is just unusually pretentious literature.
Post by: GavJ on August 19, 2014, 02:06:58 pm
It's pretty straightforward, it is not reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing where there is no possibility of evidence for its existence, so it is reasonable to not believe in the existence of a thing where there is no possibility of evidence for its existence.No...if you care to note I disagreed with the first statement, implying I do consider the burden of proof important.Maybe because at first you say that proof or evidence is irrelevant, while with the second one it suddenly is?QuoteYou disagreed that:I can't find both unreasonable? Neither is provable, both are beliefs and thus irrational.
It is quite reasonable to believe in the existence of a thing without even the possibility of evidence for its existence
But agreed that:
Atheism is a faith just like any other, because it is not possible to prove the non-existence of God
Bolded part = fail.
If an omnipotent God does exist, there are all kinds of things it could do to make its existence painfully obvious if so desired. Even a clock-maker God. You're just totally making up this "no possibility" thing.
The scientifically valid position is to hold no strong opinion at all in the mere absence of evidence. (what I would naturally call agnosticism, although people always quibble about those terms. You know what I mean)
Atheism (also in the classic schoolyard sense of "definitely no God") is not that. It is a FAITH just as much as any religion is.
Post by: Descan on August 19, 2014, 02:31:51 pm
Just looking at the world he supposedly set up and the (non-human-derived, to side-step that whole "human free will" thing) bullshit we have to put up with is enough to make me think he's probably a git. Like killing children with horrific diseases, smallpox and eye-worms and the like. Or tsunamis and such.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm not sure what you'd call that. Anti-theism? Anti-deity? Something like that.
Post by: Remuthra on August 19, 2014, 02:35:30 pm
Quote
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?(Some doubt exists as to whether this was his work specifically, but that's another matter)
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?
Post by: GavJ on August 19, 2014, 02:46:09 pm
Quote
Is he able, but not willing?Many people throughout actual history have chosen freedom despite it implying suffering for them to do so.
Then he is malevolent.
Post by: hops on August 19, 2014, 02:59:04 pm
Post by: Graknorke on August 19, 2014, 03:32:53 pm
Bolded part = fail.I was rewording the question. The question that was quoted in the post I made.
If an omnipotent God does exist, there are all kinds of things it could do to make its existence painfully obvious if so desired. Even a clock-maker God. You're just totally making up this "no possibility" thing.
The scientifically valid position is to hold no strong opinion at all in the mere absence of evidence. (what I would naturally call agnosticism, although people always quibble about those terms. You know what I mean)
Atheism (also in the classic schoolyard sense of "definitely no God") is not that. It is a FAITH just as much as any religion is.
Post by: GavJ on August 19, 2014, 03:46:36 pm
Post by: Helgoland on August 19, 2014, 04:48:22 pm
Ayup, that's pretty much the only way to rescue Leibniz's argument: God doesn't want us to be happy, he wants us to be _human_ (implying freedom of choice and such); otherwise there'd be way more papaver somniferum around. And for that, you kinda need to have evil around.QuoteIs he able, but not willing?Many people throughout actual history have chosen freedom despite it implying suffering for them to do so.
Then he is malevolent.
If he wanted slaves, he'd just make more angels.
Post by: Criptfeind on August 19, 2014, 05:11:36 pm
"You only have faith you had a hamburger for lunch."
"You only have faith you are wearing pants right now."
"You only have faith that you own a car."
"You only have faith that you are talking to me."
"You only have faith that you can't objectively prove anything in this universe. Agnosticism is a religion."
Post by: Tiruin on August 19, 2014, 05:53:54 pm
It's been about the same [very subjective] thing instead of introspective tests for quite a long while.
By which, I mean I skimmed and see statements presented as facts instead of a collective opinion. Instead of arguing with one another, set up a base point to argue upon.
Post by: Criptfeind on August 19, 2014, 06:18:06 pm
Post by: Gnorm on August 19, 2014, 06:39:10 pm
Post by: GavJ on August 19, 2014, 06:48:09 pm
Post by: Eagle_eye on August 19, 2014, 10:47:43 pm
Quote
"chemotherapy isn't natural" or "just because something 'is' doesn't mean it 'ought' to be."
The first is a necessary consequence of a definition of natural that excludes human creations, while the second is accepted as true by pretty much everyone working in ethics, and has been since the 18th century, at least, as an extension of the idea that you can't arrive at normative statements through deduction unless you start with a normative axiom. As for why it's a conflict, if you think homosexuality is wrong because it's unnatural, that means you think that something being unnatural is sufficient for it to be wrong. Chemotherapy is unnatural in the normal sense of natural. Thus, if unnatural implies immoral, chemotherapy is immoral. Either you have reasons other than the question of whether it's natural to oppose homosexuality, you think chemotherapy is wrong, or your beliefs are inconsistent.
Post by: GavJ on August 19, 2014, 11:21:50 pm
Post by: Helgoland on August 20, 2014, 02:27:24 am
"You only have faith you had a hamburger for lunch."Yes, you can do that. It's called solipsism. It's generally recognized as consistent. And as boring, because it allows no interesting deductions. Most people agree that the external world has an existence independent of our own, so we usually take that as axiomatic.
"You only have faith you are wearing pants right now."
"You only have faith that you own a car."
"You only have faith that you are talking to me."
Agnosticism in the sense of "I believe it is objectively unproveable that God exists or that he does not exist" certainly is a faith, unless you constuct the concept of 'God' in a way that implies his unproveability. However, most agnostics just say 'I dunno, and I don't think it matters all that much', which is not faith, but disinterest.
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 02:58:49 am
Anything about making strong claims or claims at all about what CAN or CANNOT ever be known are rarely part of it and would misrepresent most agnostics.
You can argue that using evidence to believe things is itself a form of faith, however that would be inconsistent with your own behaviors, unless you are currently curled in a fetal position dying of thirst and starvation because you don't believe in water, etc. So nobody really takes you seriously arguing that outside of a devil's advocate for people to briefly consider then forget about. Anybody alive and thriving in the world today evidently already agrees that evidence is a proper basis for belief, by their actions every moment of every day.
Post by: TD1 on August 20, 2014, 07:59:04 am
That's proper, general philosophical practice. I was trained to usually argue against the VALIDITY of an argument when possible (even if the premises are true, whether they are or not, the conclusion still doesn't follow) which is what they're doing. In this case, soundness of the argument is much easier to undermine (homosexuality is completely natural), but it's still less devastating than if you ARE able to establish invalidity instead.
The old synthetic and inductive arguments?
"The premises may be correct, but they in no way connect to what is stated in the conclusion..."
Post by: Criptfeind on August 20, 2014, 09:56:00 am
Post by: Helgoland on August 20, 2014, 11:43:29 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on August 20, 2014, 11:53:27 am
Let's define 'faith' as 'claiming knowledge of things that cannot be known' while allowing knowledge to be gained from experience. Thus atheism is faith, agnosticism is not, and knowledge about what I had for lunch (a bowl of delicious lentil soup) is not a matter of faith either, unless you have no way of reading what's inside the parentheses.
By that definition, you have faith that you actually had that for lunch and that your brain wasn't altered by aliens.
Anyway, I also dislike this test, especially the ones where it gives two resolutions to a conflict in its description.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2014, 12:13:21 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on August 20, 2014, 12:16:28 pm
Let's define 'faith' as 'claiming knowledge of things that cannot be known' while allowing knowledge to be gained from experience. Thus atheism is faith, agnosticism is not, and knowledge about what I had for lunch (a bowl of delicious lentil soup) is not a matter of faith either, unless you have no way of reading what's inside the parentheses.
I don't understand. I'm sorry. I don't understand the difference between relying on experience for what you had for lunch and for if there is not some supernatural being. In both cases I could be wrong, but the best I can do is work with what the world has given me.
On the other hand, this conversation has made me realize that if there was a genuinely crazy person who believed in the supernatural, I wouldn't call what they had faith. Which is interesting to me at least. But that realization doesn't bother me.
Please leave the solipsism out of the internet, it just causes more problems than it solves. Or so I think.
I think the whole point, at least my point, of why atheism is not faith is to avoid solipsism.
Post by: wobbly on August 20, 2014, 12:39:43 pm
Post by: Angle on August 20, 2014, 12:53:11 pm
Post by: scrdest on August 20, 2014, 01:19:12 pm
On atheism as faith - technically, any belief can be called a 'faith'. Belief, in the sense of any statement regarded as true. In fact, agnosticism would be a faith as well, by that standard. The trick here is the implications. 'Faith' is used as a glue between 'Belief' and 'Worship/Religion', allowing a person with ulterior motives to argue that lack of belief is a statement about divine existence, and as such a belief = faith = DERM ATHEISTS WORSHIPPING NOT HAVINK GOD or whatever.
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 01:27:49 pm
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2014, 01:29:38 pm
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2014, 01:32:01 pm
You agreed that:
So long as they do not harm others, individuals should be free to pursue their own ends
But disagreed that:
The possession of drugs for personal use should be decriminalised
Drug abuse is an external argument, but suffice it to say, I strongly disagree with their implied assertion that drug use harms no one except the user. This is especially true as a consequence of my social political views, particularly in regard to the establishment and maintenance of basic living standards. So long as the state foots part of the medical and social bills for its inhabitants, which is a condition which I support, the use of particular recreational drugs and the health and lifestyle consequences do have knock-on effects on other people.
Sorry, but this "tension" is perfectly accurate and your justification is weak as heck. Criminalize the things that actually harm others, as long as you advocate broad criminalization (or argue that the state should have authority over the health pursuits of its citizens) you can't really argue that "So long as they do not harm others, individuals should be free to pursue their own ends". Especially since drug laws, you know, have just as many (if not more) knock-on effects. The question didn't say anything about drug abuse or drug regulation, or even ask about legalization, only about decriminalization of personal use.
No, but faith is not a synonym for belief. Faith is belief without evidence, specifically. Even if they were synonyms, agnosticism doesn't qualify, since it is an absence of either belief.Hey, guess what! An absence of evidence where evidence should exist is actually evidence of absence! If someone tells me the world is just chock-full of white llamas, and I've looked around for them my whole life and not managed to find a single one, it is not faith to believe they are wrong. (Mind you, there are a LOT of definitions of gods, depending on which semantic argument you're making the same person may become more or less theistic for this exact reason)
Anyway
I got one tension,
Quote
You agreed that:
There are no objective moral standards; moral judgements are merely an expression of the values of particular cultures
And also that:
Acts of genocide stand as a testament to man's ability to do great evil
But that one is pretty easy to explain. My moral judgements are an expression of the values of my particular culture, and genocide is totally against those values, hence evil. It's almost always against the values of the people being genocided too, and in many cases it's explicitly against the values of the culture doing the genociding as well! (They just justify it as an exception).
So that's like a triple whammy of subjective evil, even without objective moral standards.
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 01:34:51 pm
Let's define 'faith' as 'claiming knowledge of things that cannot be known' while allowing knowledge to be gained from experience. Thus atheism is faith, agnosticism is not, and knowledge about what I had for lunch (a bowl of delicious lentil soup) is not a matter of faith either, unless you have no way of reading what's inside the parentheses.Remove the word "cannot" and replace with "are not". Otherwise you're misrepresenting classic agnosticism and making the whole conversation much more confusing than it has to be by implying specific claims and beliefs that need not be part of it.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2014, 01:36:53 pm
Remove the word "cannot" and replace with "are not". Otherwise you're misrepresenting classic agnosticism and making the whole conversation much more confusing than it has to be by implying specific claims and beliefs that need not be part of it.
Classic agnosticism isn't even on the same scale as atheism. You can be an atheistic of theistic agnosticism. Agnosticism is opposed to gnosticism, it isn't some place in the middle of the theism scale.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2014, 01:37:29 pm
where evidence should existGod wore gloves, so he didn't leave behind any fingerprints.
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 01:42:51 pm
Quote
Hey, guess what! An absence of evidence where evidence should exist is actually evidence of absence! If someone tells me the world is just chock-full of white llamas, and I've looked around for them my whole life and not managed to find a single one, it is not faith to believe they are wrong.Omg, no No NO. This is the #1 source of the public screwing thingsa up about science, hands down.
Not only is this wrong, but the exact opposite is one of the basic catchy rules of thumb of science, the equivalent of "correlation is not equal to causation" etc.: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
You could live in the Australian bush and look around for elephants your whole life and never find them. So the hell what? Tells you jack squat about whether they exist.
Your example is terrible, because "the world not being chock full of X" is not at all the same thing as "X does or doesn't exist" which is what everybody in the thread is talking about and what theism and atheism are about. White llamas are also not exactly omniscient, omnipotent beings, or anything like that, thus would have far fewer resources for choosing visbility. And there are even many conceptions of God as simply having put the universe into motion and then not interfering again, which there could be evidence of, but perhaps only on the scale of galactic cosmological extremely complex patterns not exactly visible from your back yard.
Quote
Agnosticism is opposed to gnosticism, it isn't some place in the middle of the theism scale.1) Not really. Gnosticism doesn't really mean anything. It was a crazy super complicated cult of weird old people who believed very specific things about Gods making mistakes creating the cosmos blah blah and has basically nothing to do with any of this. Agnosticism was a term coined by some dude as being maybe loosely relevant, not a perfect literal antithesis.
2) I agree that it's not on the theism scale. Theism vs. atheism are about differences in beliefs, whereas agnosticism is an absence of belief, thus not on the scale at all.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2014, 01:45:43 pm
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 01:50:32 pm
It's more like a grid, really, like how you could have atheist religions (no idea how theistic agnosticism would work though).Nitpick: it would be "gnosis" you're looking for. Gnosticism is a specific religion with it's own specific creation story and blah blah. Not what you want.
But yes, you can probably make a grid out of that. So? If you did, the gnosis-agnosticism dimension would be the one that varies whether it is faith or not.
Edit: actually a triangle would be more appropriate. If you are fully agnostic, theism vs. atheism is meaningless and you have no opinion (single point). As you increase in gnosis, you would gradually have more and more division ("I mostly still want evidence, but I lean very slightly in favor of there being a God in the meantime" blah blah"). This also incidentally addresses your intuitive confusion about what an agnostic theist would be: nothing, it's not really particularly valid, and a triangle design reflects that.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2014, 01:52:01 pm
Post by: Culise on August 20, 2014, 01:53:20 pm
It's more like a grid, really, like how you could have atheist religions (no idea how theistic agnosticism would work though).An god exists, but is inherently unknowable or incomprehensible in its scope. One such position (but obviously not the only such position) could be that a divinity is said to exist as an article of faith, but by function of its nature as being beyond the scope of rational science and observation, it cannot be known or understood from a rational perspective. Gnosis is in its simplest definitional sense "knowledge" (albeit, I must add, one with particular connotations pertaining to spiritual and self-knowledge in common usage), and one that has far greater scope than the particular Christian sects commonly referred to as gnostic (just as catholic is, in its simplest definitional sense, "universal").
Post by: Angle on August 20, 2014, 02:05:12 pm
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 02:11:09 pm
Quote
we're talking about the common conception of godThe most people who have lived and believed in gods in history are likely polytheistic believers of natural totem-type gods, like raven gods, etc., as this was extremely common throughout accounts of stone-bronze-iron age people in far flung diverse places around the world. Not what you just described.
Just sayin'. If you want to talk about general philosophical classifications and concepts, you really should need to account for all the major, largest slices of the pie.
Bringing up some religion that 5 guys followed 100 years ago would be whackamole. But NOT just "anything not islamic or judeo-christian" ...
it's also quite pertinent to the details of the discussion. Since most historical Gods aren't SUPPOSED to be omnipotent, and have individual spheres and personalities, significant differences in what evidence they leave behind (or not) and how interventionist they are (or not) should be expected as par for the course. Also, if you're something like a raven god, you can easily be intervening in the world via your ravens or your wind or whatever, in a way that may or may not be possible to scientifically establish as different from non-God-guided winds or ravens, yes? The conception of miracles and intervention would not probably be all that modern most of the time as "omigod obvious magical shift", but rather more subtle.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2014, 02:19:30 pm
You make a lot of posts that are factually wrong, you know that?QuoteHey, guess what! An absence of evidence where evidence should exist is actually evidence of absence! If someone tells me the world is just chock-full of white llamas, and I've looked around for them my whole life and not managed to find a single one, it is not faith to believe they are wrong.Omg, no No NO. This is the #1 source of the public screwing thingsa up about science, hands down.
Not only is this wrong, but the exact opposite is one of the basic catchy rules of thumb of science, the equivalent of "correlation is not equal to causation" etc.: "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
Evidence of Absence is one of the central tenants of empirical science. Modus tollens is an important argument in propositional logical argument. Your denial of these central components of both science and logic makes your argument here laughable.
Maybe you should try basing your statements on actual scientific and logical arguments rather than pop-sci "catchy rules of thumb"
Gnosis is in its simplest definitional sense "knowledge" (albeit, I must add, one with particular connotations pertaining to spiritual and self-knowledge in common usage), and one that has far greater scope than the particular Christian sects commonly referred to as gnostic (just as catholic is, in its simplest definitional sense, "universal").This is really it. "Gnosticism" is about knowing god, "Theism" is about believing in god. A gnostic theist believes they know/understand what god is and that they exist. A gnostic atheist believes they know/understand what god would be, and said being does not exist. (Basically everyone on the planet is several dozen shades of gnostic atheist, so we generally take this to indicate something more powerful, that they know understand all possible gods and that those gods cannot exist). Agnostic theism says they believe a god exists but do not understand and it's nature, and agnostic atheism does not believe a god exists but but that they have no knowledge of what that god would be like.
Post by: Angle on August 20, 2014, 02:24:11 pm
Quotewe're talking about the common conception of godThe most people who have lived and believed in gods in history are likely polytheistic believers of natural totem-type gods, like raven gods, etc., as this was extremely common throughout accounts of stone-bronze-iron age people in far flung diverse places around the world. Not what you just described.
Those people are dead. Their beliefs don't matter. I'm concerned with the people who are living now, who use their beliefs as justification for dickery (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_the_Levant).
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 02:31:36 pm
2) More importantly, you can't ever prove that there ISN'T an effect in modern science, so the "not Q" part of modus tollens is almost or entirely insurmountable. This isn't just statistics (although partially that, but if you only look at it from that angle, it eventually degrades into solipsism IF AND ONLY IF you have overwhelming avalanches of evidence not showing an expected trend). It's also just because the experimenter may simply not have thought of the correct experiment or measurement, in which case no sized avalanche of evidence is even relevant, and you can't even know for sure which scenario you are in!
Which is why all or nearly all modern journals and universities, etc. proceed based on a model of positive effects, not negative ones. Otherwise able to be stated as "an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"
if you disagree, find me a few articles in Science or Nature that revolve around nothing but null effects as their data. Have fun with that.
Quote
Those people are dead. Their beliefs don't matter.This is ridiculous for several reasons, the two most important ones being:
1) Polytheism is still believed by easily a billion+ people. Including many who believe in exactly the sort of thing I just described as a flavor of it.
2) ALL of the above religions, monotheistic and polytheistic alike, all claim their gods to be IMMORTAL. So why does it make any difference when the believers were alive? Those religions would have claimed that the Gods would still be alive in 2014 just as much as in 3000 B.C. so the timeline is irrelevant...
Post by: Dutchling on August 20, 2014, 02:36:21 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Angle on August 20, 2014, 02:40:56 pm
I suppose you're more interested in arguing for it's own sake. Which is fine I suppose, but it does rather annoy me- I'm trying to argue with this dude that, no his completely non-invisible unicorn does not exist and it does not give him justification to stab people, and you keep busting in with - "You can't disprove my invisible perfectly stealthy unicorn that doesn't tell me to do things!" No, I cant, and I really don't care.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2014, 02:44:20 pm
if you disagree, find me a few articles in Science or Nature that revolve around nothing but null effects as their data. Have fun with that.Every single peer review that couldn't duplicate the findings of the initial experiment. Come on dude, this is pretty trivial, do you really want me to bother even linking that shit?
People aren't usually going to bother writing a paper about an absence of evidence unless there's already a claim made about the existence of evidence, because the vast bulk of science is going "Oh, that didn't work, I guess I should try something else."
Or, in the words of Thomas Edison - “I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work.”
Even if there weren't any papers about it, your argument is like some sort of crazy assumption that every time a scientist thinks up or investigates anything they are always 100% correct from the get go, which is absurd. When most people find evidence of absence, they don't write a paper about it, they come up with an alternate hypothesis.
When they don't, when they keep pursuing something despite no evidence that it works, well... How would you refer to all the perpetual motion machine people? Would you consider them scientists? After all, perpetual motion machines might still work!
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 04:32:17 pm
Quote
Every single peer review that couldn't duplicate the findings of the initial experiment. Come on dude, this is pretty trivial, do you really want me to bother even linking that shit?I dont think you're quite understanding the concept I'm asking for.
A non-replication is not an example of this, because people who publish non-replications do not claim or intend for them to be "evidence of absence"! Non-replications are intended to do one thing and one thing only: cast doubt on pre-existing positive evidence published earlier, and to convince readers to return to a state of agnosticism regarding that data, NOT to prove any actual claim or counterclaim about how the world works.
If you attempt to publish an article that has non-replication alone, and in that article claim to have therefore proven anything about the way the world works based on that, it not only will not get published, it will not even make it past triage, and the chances are high that it would additionally significantly hurt your career reputation as well, by word of mouth.
Additionally, in my 10 years of getting paychecks exclusively to read and write papers and conduct research, guess how many publications I've come across whose only data was a non-replication? Out of hundreds of articles a year read? Precisely ONE. I published it myself, and it wasn't even a full article (virtually NO chance of that happening in academia, unless the thing you're not replicating is like, a Higgs boson or cold fusion or something). It was a 1 page invited comment on another paper, and the only conclusion from it was "these guys don't have as much evidence for their effect as they claim they do." That is all. So not only is this evidence of what you're trying to argue, but it itself pretty much never happens, either.
99% of the time, when somebody publishes non-replicating data, it is Experiment #1 out of 7 or something, and serves only as a justification for having done the additional experiments and having found whatever positive evidence they found later, which is what the paper is invariably actually about. Most often, it is non-replication of a competing theory's experiment, then filled in with replacement positive evidence of one's own theory. (do you see a trend here?)
What I'm asking for (and what is necessary to prove your point as something actually in practice by the scientific community) are examples of articles in prestigious peer-reviewed journals, where:
1) The evidence is purely null result experiments
2) They use those null results to conclude something about the way the world works, NOT to conclude something about the confidence one should place in earlier researchers' (positive evidence) work.
Quote
Even if there weren't any papers about it, your argument is like some sort of crazy assumption that every time a scientist thinks up or investigates anything they are always 100% correct from the get go, which is absurd. When most people find evidence of absence, they don't write a paper about it, they come up with an alternate hypothesis.No! You do NOT abandon theories based on null results. That's terrible practice, and anybody teaching that to new researchers should frankly be fired.
Yes, researchers are wrong all the time, of course. But you abandon theories based on positive evidence that runs contrary to the predictions of the theory, only.
For example, "All grass is red!" is my theory/hypothesis.
If I live in a desert and walk outside and can only find sand and end up with a null result, that is not a reason to abandon my hypothesis... I MIGHT decide this experiment isn't worth it and the plane tickets would cost to much to go find grass, or whatever, but that's not the same thing as proving something. That's just being too poor or having better things to do.
If however, I walk outside and find samples of green grass, then I have collected concrete, positive evidence that runs contrary to my hypothesis, so I abandon it and adjust to a new one.
Quote
the vast bulk of science is going "Oh, that didn't work, I guess I should try something else."This is also true. Null results will routinely encourage scientists to go try some other tack, for practical reasons and time constraints, etc.
That has nothing to do with it being actual evidence of a theory being wrong, however, and everything to do with efficient time management of wanting to make the most amount of discoveries about the world (all of which involve positive evidence) as quickly as possible and as cheaply as possible.
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 05:14:40 pm
I can't be arsed to get the exact numbers, but the amount of dead people around from thousand of years ago isn't that impressing.1) Right now, today, ~50% of the world is monotheistic, and ~25% is polytheistic (the remainder non-religious, or things like Buddhism that are neither poly or mono) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations#Adherent_estimatesSpoiler (click to show/hide)
2) The graph is not helpful for looking at relative milestones in history with actual amounts. http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2002/HowManyPeopleHaveEverLivedonEarth.aspx is more useful and shows that approximately 1/2 the people who ever lived, lived before 1 AD, obviously before either Christianity or Islam. (Judaism has never been a significant population amount).
So well over half the people who have ever lived were polytheistic (nearly all of the 1/2 of total folks before 1AD + large proportions of those after), and 1 out of every 4 people born today continues to be.
And it is almost a logical necessity that polytheistic gods not be omnipotent (lest they paradoxically conflict), and nearly always the case that they are not omniscient (since polytheistic mythology tends to rely heavily on gods not knowing about other gods' schemes and such, at the very least), as well as falling on a huge variety of places on the scale from omnipresence to "not that concerned about us" often varying significantly within a single pantheon. As well as varying widely on benevolence to malevolence.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2014, 06:23:39 pm
Someone tells you, 'there is a cow in that field eating grass."
You look at the field, and see no cow.
To you,
1. This is NOT evidence as to the absence of a cow in the field. (The absence of visual evidence of there being a cow where one would expect to see one, were the claim true, is not evidence of absence of the cow from the field.)
2. You would then fall back to a position of agnosticism - rather than saying that based on the evidence you have available of there not being a cow in the field (presumably because you have no such evidence), you simply respond that you do not know whether or not there is a cow in the field, nor anything about the nature of the cow.
Because people often don't publish articles solely about how a claim is false in the science journals you read.
Is that about where we are, then?
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 06:32:52 pm
And of course, in the case of an existence of God, this is also equally farcical nearly 100% of the time, since you cannot simultaneously search all of creation on every possible bandwidth of every measurement type, etc. to check for God.
Setting aside various reasons why you may not notice a cow in a field even if there, yes, perhaps in the strawman analogy of a single, limited, easily simultaneously scanned field with no obstructions and an alleged cow, you can (maybe) do that.
But in the actual appropriate analogy to what we're talking about (existence of god(s) and/or the institution of science), it is always something more like "cows exist in fields" that people care about, and due to the infeasibility of measuring every field exhaustively and simultaneously, negative evidence is practically useless.
More explicitly: if a religion claims that a god did something specific, like "made some water turn into wine on such and such a date" on a scale simmilar to your cow, and you go in your time machine and observe no such thing happening, then this might be sufficient evidence of that story being wrong, but not of the god not existing... Any proof of the being not existing would necessarily require completely impossibly extensive, comprehensive, confident, simultaneous search.
Unless of course, you're aware of any major world religions that advocate(d) something like "God only existed for 30 seconds on Friday July 7th, 1762, in London, at a southwest facing bench in Whittington Garden" in addition to multiple eyewitness accounts and full spectrum sensor analysis on hand of said bench showing nothing there.
Post by: penguinofhonor on August 20, 2014, 06:54:58 pm
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 07:03:36 pm
I have participated in several conversations about this sort of thing at home with academics and at conferences, generally begun by some tipsy person thinking they will start a lively argument, but then finding out it is uninterestingly universally agreed on by everybody 5 seconds later.
Nor, importantly, is there any particularly good reason to need to disprove the existence of unicorns. If some dude wants to devote a bunch of tax dollars or something to a unicorn reservation, or some situation where it actually might matter, all you need to do is ask him for his positive evidence of them. If he does has convincing, strong evidence, well then great, unicorns apparently exist, and give them their wildlife refuge. If he cannot produce such information, then you can discredit and disapprove of his plan and not spend those important tax dollars.
At no point in this process (or almost any other one like it) do you need to claim to have disproven unicorns in order to decide on a useful or efficient course of action. Merely that they have not been positively proven and thus do not justify investment.
Post by: Graknorke on August 20, 2014, 07:08:06 pm
At no point in this process (or almost any other one like it) do you need to claim to have disproven unicorns in order to decide on a useful or efficient course of action. Merely that they have not been positively proven and thus do not justify investment.So what is everyone arguing about again?
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 07:11:38 pm
Quote
So what is everyone arguing about again?
I believe the original reason for this topic was people stabbing or shooting other people and claiming justification by God.
The way that you would evaluate this from a scientific standpoint would be:
"Well alright, setting aside for a moment the question of whether God's will actually is a justification for something anyway, do you even have proof that it is God's will in the first place?"
"Not really."
"Okay, well that's irrelevant, then, even within the context of moral arguments."
and proceed to prosecute on the basis of other, provable things instead. Again, just like the unicorn, this process does not require disproving God at any point.
Post by: Angle on August 20, 2014, 07:55:30 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on August 20, 2014, 09:04:41 pm
I've truly enriched by life by this thread.
We should go back to the stupid foot test. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78290.msg5127352#msg5127352)
Post by: GavJ on August 20, 2014, 09:12:44 pm
Quote
Unicorns don't exist is not a valid thing to say.In a job interview for a scientific faculty or industry position? Definite red flag on hiring, yes.
In a court of law? Obviously reasonable doubt, sure, but shouldn't be proclaimed as fact.
In a pub by a regular joe? Nah. Have at it, no law against making inductive leaps, and definitely helpful for everyday practicality.
Post by: Darvi on August 20, 2014, 11:34:44 pm
"Before we finish the interview, one question.QuoteUnicorns don't exist is not a valid thing to say.In a job interview for a scientific faculty or industry position? Definite red flag on hiring, yes.
Do you believe in fairies?"
Oh man that's gonna cause them critters to go extinct before long.
Post by: Culise on August 20, 2014, 11:38:13 pm
Given how this discussion started and how it's proceeded, I suspect that the answer could be "I'm sorry, I'm not allowed to answer that because it's technically illegal to ask questions about one's religion." Watch them try to parse out that answer. :3"Before we finish the interview, one question.QuoteUnicorns don't exist is not a valid thing to say.In a job interview for a scientific faculty or industry position? Definite red flag on hiring, yes.
Do you believe in fairies?"
Oh man that's gonna cause them critters to go extinct before long.
Post by: GlyphGryph on August 20, 2014, 11:40:39 pm
"Before we finish the interview, one question.
Do you believe in fairies?"
Oh man that's gonna cause them critters to go extinct before long.
Remember that the answer isn't no, that's unjustified! You've got to think laterally and answer "I'm agnostic about this proposition."
Post by: Remuthra on August 20, 2014, 11:47:30 pm
'Course, it would be offensive to the fairyists otherwise."Before we finish the interview, one question.
Do you believe in fairies?"
Oh man that's gonna cause them critters to go extinct before long.
Remember that the answer isn't no, that's unjustified! You've got to think laterally and answer "I'm agnostic about this proposition."
Post by: GavJ on August 21, 2014, 12:07:43 am
And yes, if I worked for google making up their interview questions, I would absolutely consider adding that one. Not at all kidding. :D They have much weirder and probably less useful questions already.
Post by: nenjin on August 21, 2014, 12:56:27 am
Post by: Remuthra on August 21, 2014, 01:22:15 am
"Uhhh..."
*Disapproving note-taking*
Post by: alway on August 21, 2014, 01:40:03 am
And yes, if I worked for google making up their interview questions, I would absolutely consider adding that one. Not at all kidding. :D They have much weirder and probably less useful questions already.http://www.amazon.com/How-Would-Move-Mount-Fuji/dp/0316778494
Though such questions have fallen out of favor somewhat of late, they were important qualifiers back when programming didn't really have established educational programs teaching it. So those have slowly been replaced with programming problem solving. The absurdist interview events mentioned in that book were also largely tossed out when it became obvious that the best talent would walk out the door for the company insulting their time.
Post by: Criptfeind on August 21, 2014, 05:38:17 am
That's not agnostic.
Also holy shit how are we even on 'science' I just realized that this debate isn't even about that. It's about if calling atheism a faith is correct. And in all circles I would STILL say that's still no. Even in like super literal scientific circles they wouldn't crouch it in faith and agnosticism but say something like "It's suuuuuuuuper unlikely god exists, very very unlikely. Almost certainly no god."
It's not faith to say well okay then we might as well say that there is no god then when talking in non scientific terms in general life. It's not 'The scientifically valid position is to hold no strong opinion'. The real valid position is in fact quite strong. Just not 100%. WHICH IS CLOSE ENOUGH
((Note, to try to cut off any actual religious debate, this is just from a prospective where god doesn't exist. And since clearly we all live under a magic sky tyrant it is just hypothetical.))
Post by: Graknorke on August 21, 2014, 05:55:10 am
I'm not sure you'd want the best talent if their head is so far up their own arse.And yes, if I worked for google making up their interview questions, I would absolutely consider adding that one. Not at all kidding. :D They have much weirder and probably less useful questions already.http://www.amazon.com/How-Would-Move-Mount-Fuji/dp/0316778494
Though such questions have fallen out of favor somewhat of late, they were important qualifiers back when programming didn't really have established educational programs teaching it. So those have slowly been replaced with programming problem solving. The absurdist interview events mentioned in that book were also largely tossed out when it became obvious that the best talent would walk out the door for the company insulting their time.
Post by: GavJ on August 21, 2014, 06:11:49 pm
Quote
Even a scientist wouldn't say "I'm agnostic about the existence of the super natural."Yes, they would. I actually led a local "journal club" in my own department years ago with about 20 science grad students in attendance about exactly that. We were reading some recent meta-studies about ESP, and I'm pretty down to the person they entered with open minds, considered the data for what it was, and left with mostly equally open minds.
I don't think most would even agree with you that "It's a very likely no." They really shouldn't agree with that. I CERTAINLY do not.
Why? Because how the hell would you ever even approach beginning to place a quantifier on the likelihood of it? There's no basis for doing so. The only way you could BEGIN to quantify the likelihood would be if you had already concretely established exactly how common and how powerful supernatural events must be, if they exist. Then you could start to crunch the statistics of likelihood. But of course you don't have either of those pieces of information. You do NOT know how powerful it would be if it exists, so you don't know how sensitive your measurements would have to be. And you do NOT know how common it would be, either, so you don't have any way to calculate how the number of investigations correlates to a % likelihood of existence.
To claim that you do know a likelihood about this is to make irresponsible conclusions based on assumptions you don't have data for.
Quote
Also holy shit how are we even on 'science'It's closely related. Agnosticism is for most intents and purposes basically "science-ism" or "evidence-ism" and agnosticism comes up almost every time anybody mentions atheism, and vice versa.
Quote
"It's suuuuuuuuper unlikely god exists, very very unlikely. Almost certainly no god."This IS faith for the same reasons described above for why you can't place a likelihood on supernatural forces: You don't know how powerful or influential God WOULD be if he exists, and you don't know how pervasive any measurable influences WOULD be if he exists. Therefore you simply do not have the numbers to perform any valid calculations (explicit or intuitive) about likelihoods.
To put it more concretely:
Scenario 1) God left fingerprints everywhere in the universe, and/or actively intervenes on a daily basis. If you knew this to be true, then failure to find any fingerprints or intervention with exhaustive searching you would be able to logically conclude that there is a low likelihood of God existing.
Scenario 2) God has left only 1 or 2 fingerprints that are measurable in the whole of the universe's creation. If you knew this to be true, then an exhaustive search of Earth wouldn't really tell you much at all about the likelihood of God existing. It would lower the likelihood, but only infinitesimally so, because after all, maybe that 1 fingerprint is simply on Mars. Or maybes it's 50,000 lightyears away on some asteroid.
And the simple fact is, nobody knows whether, if God were to exist, if it would be Scenario 1 or Scenario 2. Your claim in the quote clearly assumes Scenario 1, but you just decided out of thin air that that's what it must be. You have no basis for making that decision in science. Nor does anybody else. Thus, nobody has ANY idea whether a given amount of searching implies that you should lower your likelihoods by a lot or a little.
Thus, somebody being confident about how "there is almost certainly no God" is just talking out of their arse as far as Science is concerned. they may happen to be correct or not, but their belief is purely faith-based, since there's no actual way to know that likelihood from evidence or data in the context of only negative findings.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on September 03, 2014, 11:50:04 am
i have a very good idea (http://www.quotev.com/quiz/4529078/What-Anime-Girl-Stereotype-are-you/)
Post by: Arx on September 03, 2014, 11:53:49 am
Post by: Phmcw on September 03, 2014, 11:58:20 am
Post by: Culise on September 03, 2014, 12:20:47 pm
Quote
Danderes types are the distant characters with a social aloofness. Quiet, withdrawn and timid, they remain in the shadows and rarely express themselves. They struggle to share their feelings with people, even their closest friends, which means they can sometimes be mistaken for being cold. However Danderes are anything but cold; they have soft hearts, but it just happens to be hidden behind a protective shell due to how they were treated in the past. People should take it as a major honour if a Dandere opens up to them.
Spoiler: Detailed answer breakdown (click to show/hide)
Post by: notquitethere on September 03, 2014, 01:21:29 pm
Quote
The Meganekko is the girl who wears glasses. There is something about an anime character wearing glasses which gives them an odd vulnerability that people find endearing. Meganekkos are normally gentle, modest, soft-spoken people who tend to be quite shy, preferring the introverted lifestyle. They are bookish people who love to read and are very passionate about particular topics they have studied. Even if you do not own a pair of glasses, you hold the common personality traits assigned to anime girls with glasses.
Spoiler: Breakdown (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 03, 2014, 01:32:38 pm
/me adjusts glassesGod damn you.
i have a very good idea (http://www.quotev.com/quiz/4529078/What-Anime-Girl-Stereotype-are-you/)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Dandere, no surprises there. Baka.
Post by: My Name is Immaterial on September 03, 2014, 01:36:11 pm
The fuck is this. Wut. No, no thanks.
Post by: Dutchling on September 03, 2014, 01:37:13 pm
Post by: Haspen on September 03, 2014, 01:38:05 pm
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on September 03, 2014, 01:38:46 pm
And then 1 in both Imouto and Loli.
Now if only I knew what a Kamidere was...
Post by: Darvi on September 03, 2014, 01:40:51 pm
Clearly I have to forsake my avvy text now.
Post by: Culise on September 03, 2014, 01:42:05 pm
Apparently, equal parts Kamidere and Kuudere, with Dandere close behind.
And then 1 in both Imouto and Loli.
Now if only I knew what a Kamidere was...
Quote
The Kamidere type is the ultimate force to be reckoned with. Bossy, stubborn and never excepting "no" for an answer, they are the ruling dictators of everyday life with a major superiority complex. People cower in fear in their presence, but the Kamidere will show no mercy and will always use people however they wish. Kamideres demand special treatment and live to control people; they see themselves as higher beings, while everybody else is their servant. Anybody who dares to defy them will receive a violent punishment.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on September 03, 2014, 01:43:14 pm
At least the description I read. The description above puts me firmly into Kuudere territory.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on September 03, 2014, 01:45:18 pm
Post by: Graknorke on September 03, 2014, 01:51:13 pm
That's... not entirely inaccurate. I wouldn't say I mean well, but eh.
Post by: Glloyd on September 03, 2014, 01:52:03 pm
/me opens quiz in Incognito browsing, because he's at work.
The fuck is this. Wut. No, no thanks.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 03, 2014, 01:58:28 pm
/me opens quiz in Incognito browsing, because he's at work.
The fuck is this. Wut. No, no thanks.
Post by: TD1 on September 03, 2014, 02:00:40 pm
SEXIST!
Nonetheless:
Meganekko
The Meganekko is the girl who wears glasses. There is something about an anime character wearing glasses which gives them an odd vulnerability that people find endearing. Meganekkos are normally gentle, modest, soft-spoken people who tend to be quite shy, preferring the introverted lifestyle. They are bookish people who love to read and are very passionate about particular topics they have studied. Even if you do not own a pair of glasses, you hold the common personality traits assigned to anime girls with glasses.
Share on Facebook
Post by: Frumple on September 03, 2014, 02:02:28 pm
Spoiler: breakdown (click to show/hide)
Post by: Xantalos on September 03, 2014, 02:04:12 pm
Post by: Wimopy on September 03, 2014, 02:05:27 pm
Thing is, I usually feel like I'm choosing the answers to get a specific result on a personality test... ah well.
Spoiler: Breakdown (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 03, 2014, 02:06:46 pm
Anime Stereotype: Dandere (Weirdly accurate)
Spoiler: Description (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Breakdown (click to show/hide)
Post by: TamerVirus on September 03, 2014, 02:07:06 pm
Ehehe
Post by: Ochita on September 03, 2014, 02:08:54 pm
Post by: notquitethere on September 03, 2014, 02:25:11 pm
Post by: scrdest on September 03, 2014, 02:27:03 pm
Post by: TamerVirus on September 03, 2014, 02:27:27 pm
The trouble with the quiz is I'm a well-rounded human being, not a one-dimensional caricature.
Well shit, isn't being well rounded a one dimensional characature in itself?
Post by: Facekillz058 on September 03, 2014, 02:32:10 pm
Why did I even spend time doing this.
Post by: werty892 on September 03, 2014, 02:32:44 pm
Post by: Baffler on September 03, 2014, 02:33:40 pm
Post by: AlleeCat on September 03, 2014, 02:35:46 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 03, 2014, 02:45:18 pm
Post by: Dutchling on September 03, 2014, 02:46:20 pm
2 parts Bokukko, 2 parts Meganekko, 2 parts Moe and 7 parts various.Are we talking about porn now?
Post by: Criptfeind on September 03, 2014, 02:46:42 pm
Post by: TD1 on September 03, 2014, 02:49:42 pm
2 parts Bokukko, 2 parts Meganekko, 2 parts Moe and 7 parts various.Are we talking about porn now?
*Punches the Dutchling right in the Netherlands.*
Post by: Frumple on September 03, 2014, 02:54:43 pm
2 parts Bokukko, 2 parts Meganekko, 2 parts Moe and 7 parts various.You have more moe in your soul than I.
This cannot be allowed. Give me your eyes!
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 03, 2014, 03:04:02 pm
2 parts Bokukko, 2 parts Meganekko, 2 parts Moe and 7 parts various.You have more moe in your soul than I.
This cannot be allowed. Give me your eyes!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutchling on September 03, 2014, 03:11:47 pm
Post by: Ogdibus on September 03, 2014, 03:14:41 pm
Meganekko 3
Yamato Nadeshiko 2
Dojikko 2
Yandere 1
Kamidere 1
Ojou 1
Which one should I pick to break the tie?
Post by: Darvi on September 03, 2014, 03:17:18 pm
Dandere 3Dojikko.
Meganekko 3
Yamato Nadeshiko 2
Dojikko 2
Yandere 1
Kamidere 1
Ojou 1
Which one should I pick to break the tie?
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 03, 2014, 03:26:02 pm
The high YN score puzzled me, so I redid the quiz, picking different random answers for the girly questions. It was reduced to 1.
Post by: Cheeetar on September 03, 2014, 03:30:42 pm
Post by: Spehss _ on September 03, 2014, 03:49:15 pm
Spoiler: Dandere. (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on September 03, 2014, 04:04:55 pm
Apparently I'm this.
Quote
MoeYou are pure of heart, kind and loving; the type of character people just can't help but find totally endearing. Sweet and submissive, you put your faith in everyone and believe that everybody has goodness within them. Naturally you are fawned over by many, and people feel a strong urge to protect you from harm. Little do they know that you can easily take care of yourself! Moe types may be soft but they are in control of their lives and tick all the boxes for the role as lead character.
Spoiler: Stats (click to show/hide)
._.
Those highest ones describe me very well...
...I would not have picked the vanilla cake. But that was the best there was x_x
Edit: Retook.
Because lanterns are awesome things as a design.
Spoiler: Stats again (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on September 03, 2014, 04:10:02 pm
Quote
You are pure of heart, kind and loving; the type of character people just can't help but find totally endearing. Sweet and submissive, you put your faith in everyone and believe that everybody has goodness within them.
Tiruin? Kind? Loving? Nahhhhh.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on September 03, 2014, 04:11:15 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on September 03, 2014, 04:50:14 pm
Then again, I would make for a terrible animu-girl.
Post by: mastahcheese on September 03, 2014, 05:21:11 pm
Is that bad?
Post by: Helgoland on September 03, 2014, 05:23:36 pm
Post by: mastahcheese on September 03, 2014, 05:37:06 pm
Neko 4
Bokukko 3
Dojikko 2
Kuudere 1
Yamato Nadeshiko 1
Moe 1
Post by: Darvi on September 03, 2014, 05:43:24 pm
Post by: ~Neri on September 03, 2014, 06:07:52 pm
Spoiler: Result~ : (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Breakdownthingy~ : (click to show/hide)
Funs/interestings I guess~
Post by: Frumple on September 03, 2014, 06:08:29 pm
Thank you.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: They go wonderfully with the rest of the collection (click to show/hide)
Post by: Spehss _ on September 03, 2014, 06:17:15 pm
Took me a bit to realize those are eyes. Looked like weird sideways smiley faces.Thank you.Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler: They go wonderfully with the rest of the collection (click to show/hide)
Post by: NAV on September 03, 2014, 06:54:19 pm
Kuudere 3
Meganekko 2
Dojikko 1
Ane 1
Tsundere 1
Yandere 1
Seems accurate.
Post by: BadLemonsXI on September 03, 2014, 06:56:43 pm
Same here. Can I get a link to this test thing or something?Took me a bit to realize those are eyes. Looked like weird sideways smiley faces.Thank you.Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler: They go wonderfully with the rest of the collection (click to show/hide)
Post by: NAV on September 03, 2014, 07:01:07 pm
/me adjusts glasses
i have a very good idea (http://www.quotev.com/quiz/4529078/What-Anime-Girl-Stereotype-are-you/)
Post by: Vector on September 03, 2014, 07:08:25 pm
Post by: Lagslayer on September 03, 2014, 07:20:02 pm
For the guys/non Japanese obsessed, try to visualize a suitable equivalent for the rather specific answers (after finding out what they are, of course).
Spoiler: breakdown. Not sure why I'm missing a point. (click to show/hide)
Post by: BadLemonsXI on September 03, 2014, 07:20:16 pm
Spoiler: Well shit. The Result (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Breakdownthingy (click to show/hide)
Post by: SealyStar on September 03, 2014, 07:22:54 pm
Kuudeo Kuudemus
Kuudes Kuudetis
Kuudet Kuudent
Post by: ~Neri on September 03, 2014, 07:25:58 pm
Megankko. Makes sense.I don't really need to visualize an equivalent~ It's pretty obvious that mine was mostly correct~
For the guys/non Japanese obsessed, try to visualize a suitable equivalent for the rather specific answers (after finding out what they are, of course).
Post by: BadLemonsXI on September 03, 2014, 07:36:10 pm
Lol that's what I thought about yours to. . .But I didn't see myself as being Perv/Pedo bait.Megankko. Makes sense.I don't really need to visualize an equivalent~ It's pretty obvious that mine was mostly correct~
For the guys/non Japanese obsessed, try to visualize a suitable equivalent for the rather specific answers (after finding out what they are, of course).
Post by: SquatchHammer on September 03, 2014, 07:39:13 pm
Neko
4
Meganekko
3
Dandere
2
Kuudere
1
Dojikko
1
Genki
1
Post by: RedKing on September 03, 2014, 07:48:41 pm
Whatever the fuck that is.
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 03, 2014, 07:55:34 pm
Whatever the fuck that is.
Post by: Gnorm on September 03, 2014, 09:23:04 pm
Kuudere: 3
Ojou: 3
Ane: 2
Loli: 1
Yandere: 1
Meganekko: 1
Moe: 1
Genki: 1
Post by: Tiruin on September 03, 2014, 09:27:46 pm
Quote
AneAne means "big sister". Ane characters are the most reliable and kind-hearted people, forever putting others before themselves. They have a down-to-earth outlook towards life and are very mature for their age. Friends say they are wise beyond their years. Anes like to take care of others due to their caring and parental nature, and have a deep protective streak. They know the best advice to share with friends when they have a problem, and their handy practical skills are always useful for when someone needs an extra helping hand.
Spoiler: Stats (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tawa on September 03, 2014, 09:47:31 pm
Post by: TamerVirus on September 03, 2014, 09:49:28 pm
*puts away knife*
Post by: Mech#4 on September 03, 2014, 10:40:59 pm
I do feel rather out of touch, I only recognised about half of the Disney princesses, about up to Mulan.
Post by: Tawa on September 03, 2014, 10:56:56 pm
Post by: Sirus on September 03, 2014, 11:42:36 pm
Followed closely by kamidere (no surprise) and dandere (ditto).
Post by: RedKing on September 03, 2014, 11:45:48 pm
I think this comes as a surprise to precisely no one. :PQuoteAneAne means "big sister". Ane characters are the most reliable and kind-hearted people, forever putting others before themselves. They have a down-to-earth outlook towards life and are very mature for their age. Friends say they are wise beyond their years. Anes like to take care of others due to their caring and parental nature, and have a deep protective streak. They know the best advice to share with friends when they have a problem, and their handy practical skills are always useful for when someone needs an extra helping hand.
Post by: Sirus on September 03, 2014, 11:50:34 pm
For Tiruin? No surprise whatsoever.I think this comes as a surprise to precisely no one. :PQuoteAneAne means "big sister". Ane characters are the most reliable and kind-hearted people, forever putting others before themselves. They have a down-to-earth outlook towards life and are very mature for their age. Friends say they are wise beyond their years. Anes like to take care of others due to their caring and parental nature, and have a deep protective streak. They know the best advice to share with friends when they have a problem, and their handy practical skills are always useful for when someone needs an extra helping hand.
Post by: Alev on September 04, 2014, 12:14:14 am
Post by: uber pye on September 04, 2014, 12:15:54 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
whelp its right, introvert with glasses
Post by: Xantalos on September 04, 2014, 12:16:54 am
Huh, and this too.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
whelp its right, introvert with glasses
Post by: ~Neri on September 04, 2014, 12:57:13 am
I just picked a random one out of the ones I'd heard of and double checked to make sure she was in an adaptation of a classical fairy tale without a large number of added twists and turns.I just picked Mulan cause she was the only one I recognized~ Alsos... She was a princess?
Post by: SalmonGod on September 04, 2014, 01:07:55 am
... I actually find this very fitting. Surprising, since I couldn't find an answer I felt fit me for like half of the questions.
Spoiler: Detailed Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Jelle on September 04, 2014, 01:57:48 am
Why am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on September 04, 2014, 01:59:52 am
Post by: Tiruin on September 04, 2014, 02:02:35 am
Disney Princess == Any female protagonist, I believe.I just picked a random one out of the ones I'd heard of and double checked to make sure she was in an adaptation of a classical fairy tale without a large number of added twists and turns.I just picked Mulan cause she was the only one I recognized~ Alsos... She was a princess?
Just like Disney Prince, I think.
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 04, 2014, 02:25:10 am
Why am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???Liar! Everyone's into anime!
Post by: BadLemonsXI on September 04, 2014, 03:10:57 am
Everybody! GET 'EM! This is a joke btwWhy am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???
Edit: Aahahahaha I got the quot's messed up XD I originally quoted Insanity but removed it but looks like I mixed them up!
Why am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???Everybody! GET 'EM! This is a joke btw This is what I was meant to say XD!
Post by: Mech#4 on September 04, 2014, 03:22:38 am
Why am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???Everybody! GET 'EM! This is a joke btw
なっ!何をするだァーッ ゆるさッ!
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 04, 2014, 03:40:41 am
DAMMIT LEMONS THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID AND YOU KNOW ITWhy am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???Everybody! GET 'EM! SOD YOUR JOKES
Post by: LordSlowpoke on September 04, 2014, 03:42:32 am
5/5 will do again
i'm moe apparently, go figure
Post by: BadLemonsXI on September 04, 2014, 04:54:31 am
Wait what . . . Ahahahahahahaha sorry I messed that up XD Ahahahahaha I'll go fix that now XD Hahahahaha!DAMMIT LEMONS THAT'S NOT WHAT I SAID AND YOU KNOW ITWhy am I doing this I'm not even into anime. ???Everybody! GET 'EM! SOD YOUR JOKES
なっ!何をするだァーッ ゆるさッ!Put that in a Google searchand I'll get bay12 at the top results. . .that's pretty cool!
Post by: Wimopy on September 04, 2014, 09:04:56 am
なっ!何をするだァーッ ゆるさッ!Put that in a Google searchand I'll get bay12 at the top results. . .that's pretty cool!
I put that in Google Translate and have no idea what I just got.
Quote
Na~tsu! Nani o suruda ~āyyuru-sa ~tsu!
Quote
Now! ~A~tsu Yuru-sa~tsu what I be!
I really should learn Japanese next summer.
Post by: Alev on September 04, 2014, 10:04:22 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mech#4 on September 04, 2014, 11:09:53 am
なっ!何をするだァーッ ゆるさッ!Put that in a Google searchand I'll get bay12 at the top results. . .that's pretty cool!
I put that in Google Translate and have no idea what I just got.QuoteNa~tsu! Nani o suruda ~āyyuru-sa ~tsu!QuoteNow! ~A~tsu Yuru-sa~tsu what I be!
I really should learn Japanese next summer.
It's a quote from "Jojo's Bizzare Adventure". Left a ん out. "Na! nani o suruda Yurusan!" "Wh-What are you doing? Unforgivable!"
Post by: SealyStar on September 04, 2014, 12:31:52 pm
Could be third declension too. Depends if it's a short or long e.Kuudere.
Whatever the fuck that is.I am a Kuudere, which I believe is a Latin verb.High five~
Kuudeo Kuudemus
Kuudes Kuudetis
Kuudet Kuudent
Kuudo Kuudimus
Kuudis Kuuditis
Kuudit Kuudunt
Post by: Lyeos on September 04, 2014, 12:33:12 pm
Spoiler: Tadaa! (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: And this thing. (click to show/hide)
Post by: mastahcheese on September 04, 2014, 05:42:18 pm
Pretty much.Disney Princess == Any female protagonist, I believe.I just picked a random one out of the ones I'd heard of and double checked to make sure she was in an adaptation of a classical fairy tale without a large number of added twists and turns.I just picked Mulan cause she was the only one I recognized~ Alsos... She was a princess?
Just like Disney Prince, I think.
I personally don't understand why Nala is on the list, and she's more princess than half of them.
I chose Mulan, as well.
Post by: Lyeos on September 04, 2014, 05:46:38 pm
Though Mulan is definitely the best.
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 04, 2014, 08:24:46 pm
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 04, 2014, 08:41:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit: I am the same as Tiruin? I'll take that as a complement. She is a great person. ;)
Post by: penguinofhonor on September 04, 2014, 09:07:42 pm
Dojikko
The Dojikko is the clumsy character. No matter what it is they are doing, the Dojikko will always find a way to accidentally drop something, hit their head, lose something important or trip over. Destined to be accident-prone, these poor characters are forever having to apologise to people and clean up after their mistakes. "Airheaded" would be the perfect way to describe their naive and forgetful thought processes. But Dojikkos are people who mean well and they have hearts of gold, so they are always forgiven for their clumsiness because of this. But please keep a band-aid spare!
Dojikko: 4
Dandere: 3
Meganekko: 2
Loli: 1
Genki: 1
Yamato Nadeshiko: 1
Man, that last one sounds badass.
Post by: Tawa on September 04, 2014, 09:15:55 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on September 04, 2014, 09:29:43 pm
Did you read the description?Implying that it's not a badass archetype. Granted, a different sort of badass, but yeah. Social combat is best combat.
Post by: Tiruin on September 04, 2014, 09:36:10 pm
How do you do this quiz? It only lets me pick one answer! I either fit half, or none at all!I'm flattened. :DAnd yet I still kind of got a result that fits? I'm a bit too paranoid to be Moe in my opinion...Spoiler (click to show/hide)But the other two fit me perfectly!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit: I am the same as Tiruin? I'll take that as a complement. She is a great person. ;)
...I know that isn't the word but argh can't remember the term right now :'(
Guh, words. Why do they run at this time.
Oh, and the stat-area is highlight/copy-paste able :3 Drag that mouse and ctrl c/p!
Post by: MaximumZero on September 04, 2014, 09:38:06 pm
Flattered is the word you're looking for. I hope.How do you do this quiz? It only lets me pick one answer! I either fit half, or none at all!I'm flattened. :DAnd yet I still kind of got a result that fits? I'm a bit too paranoid to be Moe in my opinion...Spoiler (click to show/hide)But the other two fit me perfectly!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit: I am the same as Tiruin? I'll take that as a complement. She is a great person. ;)
...I know that isn't the word but argh can't remember the term right now :'(
Guh, words. Why do they run at this time.
Oh, and the stat-area is highlight/copy-paste able :3 Drag that mouse and ctrl c/p!
Post by: Tiruin on September 04, 2014, 09:39:47 pm
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 04, 2014, 09:51:58 pm
Edit: Also, I randomly flatter people. The sadder I am, the more it happens. Sorry if it weirded you out or anything...
Post by: Itnetlolor on September 05, 2014, 01:39:52 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Breakdown (click to show/hide)
Not a bad balance, after reading all the breakdown ones, and their relevance level.
Post by: hops on September 05, 2014, 01:41:32 am
Eh.
Post by: Tiruin on September 05, 2014, 03:34:49 am
A bit tough to drag my mouse on a tablet though. :PI think the word I was finding was similar to appreciative, since I remember 'flatter' can be taken in a bad way :o
Edit: Also, I randomly flatter people. The sadder I am, the more it happens. Sorry if it weirded you out or anything...
Not weirded out, silly xD
I'm pretty happy for the test though. New information about the...erh, culture?
New info about anime anyway ._.
Post by: hops on September 05, 2014, 03:38:28 am
Like 'You flatter me' mean something like 'I think you're over-exaggerating how good I am.'
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 05, 2014, 03:53:22 am
For example, I could flatter Objective by saying that he has a fantastic sigpeen...
Post by: hops on September 05, 2014, 04:03:15 am
Post by: Steelmagic on September 05, 2014, 05:38:54 am
Spoiler: Description (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Details and all that (click to show/hide)
Post by: alexandertnt on September 05, 2014, 07:19:29 am
Spoiler: Description (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Breakdown (click to show/hide)
Post by: mastahcheese on September 05, 2014, 08:15:12 am
Post by: Itnetlolor on September 05, 2014, 08:20:13 am
Post by: Vector on September 05, 2014, 07:36:04 pm
Post by: Spehss _ on September 05, 2014, 07:42:05 pm
Post by: IronTomato on September 05, 2014, 10:00:44 pm
Post by: Tawa on September 05, 2014, 10:05:03 pm
Why?
Well, this quiz came into being a short time after the 12-day Simpsons marathon, so every time I hear Moe, I think of the bartender from the show, who is the complete opposite of the stereotype presented.
*snigger*
Post by: Lyeos on September 05, 2014, 10:19:06 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on September 05, 2014, 10:22:06 pm
The one thing about this quiz that makes me snicker is the 'Moe' stereotype.Relevant. (http://youtu.be/FtKnTegOIM4)
Why?
Well, this quiz came into being a short time after the 12-day Simpsons marathon, so every time I hear Moe, I think of the bartender from the show, who is the complete opposite of the stereotype presented.
*snigger*
Post by: NAV on September 05, 2014, 10:48:21 pm
Post by: Tiruin on September 05, 2014, 11:42:18 pm
Hey, big sister tomboys who are cold and unemotional can be cute too.This.
I know.
._.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 21, 2014, 11:35:07 pm
Oh god the testimonials.
Post by: Spehss _ on September 21, 2014, 11:42:25 pm
http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/Heh, taken that before. Shitlord reporting in.
Oh god the testimonials.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on September 21, 2014, 11:43:36 pm
Post by: Uristides on September 21, 2014, 11:46:56 pm
http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/This became way more funnier when I realized I could be an asian latino muslim buddhist who lives in India, Greece and Palestine.
Oh god the testimonials.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 21, 2014, 11:47:34 pm
"Human" kinship + "social autism" + "able-bodied" = 145 "Shitlord"
Definitely non-otherkin and able bodied seem to give automatic + 70-80s.
Post by: Aedel on September 21, 2014, 11:51:23 pm
wat
Post by: Tiruin on September 22, 2014, 12:06:11 am
http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/Eurgh.
Oh god the testimonials.
That is a test? :-\
Post by: Cheeetar on September 22, 2014, 12:12:00 am
http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/
Oh god the testimonials.
Privilege of 130, shitlord level.
Post by: Putnam on September 22, 2014, 12:21:57 am
If I had switched out "human" with "dragonkin", I probably would have gotten in the negative hundreds. Going for full oppression got me -2300 or so. Fun test, almost surely a parody.
Post by: Sirus on September 22, 2014, 12:27:53 am
I would have sworn that I was more privileged than that :P
Eurgh.Not a real one, surely.
That is a test? :-\
Post by: WillowLuman on September 22, 2014, 12:30:46 am
Post by: Spehss _ on September 22, 2014, 12:48:16 am
Post by: Heron TSG on September 22, 2014, 12:51:13 am
As for my anime girl stereotype, I am Genki. I'm fuckin brimming with sunshine over here.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 22, 2014, 12:52:56 am
Pretty sure this is indeed a parody, guys. Recall reading it started from guys on 4chan or something to mock tumblr's privilege SJW movement.
Well if you have a look at the testimonials, which have to be cleared by the admins, the answer becomes clear.
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 22, 2014, 01:03:54 am
http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/-3970, because the quiz is broken and I selected every option for every question.
395 with serious answers. Except I had to say I lived in Meh Europe instead of NZ.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hops on September 22, 2014, 04:29:55 am
http://www.checkmyprivilege.com/
Oh god the testimonials.
Quote
We deeply regret this choice of words and sincerely apologize for any triggering, offense, irritation, annoyance, upset stomach, acid reflux, indigestion, or diarrhea this may have caused.
SOLD
Post by: scrdest on September 22, 2014, 04:30:11 am
Pretty sure this is indeed a parody, guys. Recall reading it started from guys on 4chan or something to mock tumblr's privilege SJW movement.
And I recall it being posted before, and me saying the exact same thing as Spehss_ here.
Post by: hops on September 22, 2014, 04:32:46 am
Post by: mastahcheese on September 22, 2014, 11:47:12 am
Got 100, Shitlord.
Granted, a left a couple questions blank because I either didn't know how to answer or didn't feel one fit.
Post by: Haspen on September 22, 2014, 11:50:11 am
Post by: WillowLuman on September 22, 2014, 11:53:13 am
Mah score is -50 :'c
Don't worry, oppression is like golf: lower score is better.
Post by: Culise on September 22, 2014, 11:54:51 am
Quote
Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -4080Y-yes, that's perfectly accurate and representative. What are you implying? Are you oppressing me in the name of the patriarchy?
Actual score was 80.
Post by: Darvi on September 22, 2014, 11:56:42 am
Post by: MaximumZero on September 22, 2014, 12:01:17 pm
Post by: Arx on September 22, 2014, 12:05:10 pm
Now it's minus two-ninety. It would be nice to think that they're the brand of dumb that thinks that I'm a white at risk of suffering reverse apartheid, but if I remember correctly, they're the kind of dumb that subtracts four hundred from your score because you're not first world.
Post by: Darvi on September 22, 2014, 12:13:41 pm
Post by: RedKing on September 22, 2014, 12:33:33 pm
Post by: Ochita on September 22, 2014, 12:38:06 pm
Eh.
Post by: Xanmyral on September 22, 2014, 12:48:06 pm
Post by: Noel.se on September 22, 2014, 01:40:08 pm
I'm a solid 130. Affluent Swiss shitlord.
460 appears to be the maximum.
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 22, 2014, 01:56:54 pm
Post by: Iceblaster on September 22, 2014, 02:03:50 pm
Spoiler: Desu Kawaii, baka! (click to show/hide)
@ Privelege
Spoiler: Oppressive Shitlord's represent! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ai Shizuka on September 22, 2014, 02:38:15 pm
Holy shit it's almost scary. The description is totally me.
Like, down to almost every single detail.
INTJ
Post by: Itnetlolor on September 22, 2014, 04:32:47 pm
Huh. I took it again to make sure I didn't misread anything. Score's the same. Some of the questions were odd, though.
I take it that anywhere between -50 → 50 would be average.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 22, 2014, 05:34:07 pm
I'm kind of surprised actually. I guess gender is really important...
Also, what is kinship? I am confused.
Post by: Tawa on September 22, 2014, 05:38:57 pm
That quiz sucks. I am many things, and "shitlord" is not one of them.
Also, I agree with Kal, the kin-thing was fucking weird.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 22, 2014, 05:41:24 pm
Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -105.Otherkin. Seems to add tons of oppression points for going around saying "I'm actually a dragon/eagle/whatever trapped in human form!" and not being taken seriously.
I'm kind of surprised actually. I guess gender is really important...
Also, what is kinship? I am confused.
Post by: Tawa on September 22, 2014, 05:42:11 pm
That that is a question on the quiz, that is.
Seriously.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 22, 2014, 05:46:35 pm
"Stop oppressing me, I am the dovahkiin!" :PYour privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -105.Otherkin. Seems to add tons of oppression points for going around saying "I'm actually a dragon/eagle/whatever trapped in human form!" and not being taken seriously.
I'm kind of surprised actually. I guess gender is really important...
Also, what is kinship? I am confused.
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 22, 2014, 05:57:14 pm
Post by: Tawa on September 22, 2014, 06:03:46 pm
I think we're at the perfect spot for a WoT reference, but I just can't put my finger on it.Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -105.Otherkin. Seems to add tons of oppression points for going around saying "I'm actually a dragon/eagle/whatever trapped in human form!" and not being taken seriously.
I'm kind of surprised actually. I guess gender is really important...
Also, what is kinship? I am confused.
dragonkin
Post by: MaximumZero on September 22, 2014, 06:27:25 pm
The worst part about this is that some people seriously don't understand why people blow them off when they say shit like this.Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -105.Otherkin. Seems to add tons of oppression points for going around saying "I'm actually a dragon/eagle/whatever trapped in human form!" and not being taken seriously.
I'm kind of surprised actually. I guess gender is really important...
Also, what is kinship? I am confused.
Post by: notquitethere on September 22, 2014, 07:23:30 pm
"Stop oppressing me, I am the dovahkiin!" :PWell, I laughed.
Post by: Xantalos on September 22, 2014, 07:34:58 pm
Post by: IronTomato on September 22, 2014, 07:44:37 pm
Post by: Gentlefish on September 22, 2014, 08:59:37 pm
Post by: Gnorm on September 22, 2014, 09:15:29 pm
WHY CAN'T I STOP OPPRESSING PEOPLE!
EDIT: The testimonials are some of the funniest things I have read in weeks.
Post by: NAV on September 22, 2014, 09:25:43 pm
Guess it's because I'm a tall straight middle class white male living in North America.
Post by: Gnorm on September 22, 2014, 09:44:34 pm
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 22, 2014, 09:49:15 pm
190 SHITLORDStop oppressing me! The tall non-straight upper class white person living in north America...
Guess it's because I'm a tall straight middle class white male living in North America.
Post by: alexandertnt on September 22, 2014, 10:14:58 pm
-80, Disadvantaged. I noticed there is no income option for between 65k and 100k.
Same test without dragonkin got -5.
(are "kins" limited to those people who think they have spirits/genetic-memory/other-nonsense, or can it include something like "X is cool, I wish I was an X.")
Post by: WillowLuman on September 22, 2014, 10:18:49 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on September 23, 2014, 12:04:18 am
Post by: Xantalos on September 23, 2014, 12:06:38 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 23, 2014, 12:08:20 am
Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.B-but timeclonekin-chan!
Post by: MaximumZero on September 23, 2014, 12:14:30 am
We can't be otherkin. We're the same, but only slightly different. That makes us not-other.Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.B-but timeclonekin-chan!
Post by: uber pye on September 23, 2014, 12:27:00 am
also i checked everything and got a score of -3970
Post by: Spehss _ on September 23, 2014, 12:28:01 am
Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.Dumber than people who say they're headmates with an entire universe? (http://i.imgur.com/rFTrn2x.png)
Post by: hops on September 23, 2014, 12:30:04 am
Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.One word:
Buskin
Any individual with that score would've already been erased out of existence by the Time Police.QuoteYour privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -4080
Post by: Glloyd on September 23, 2014, 12:52:49 am
Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.Dumber than people who say they're headmates with an entire universe? (http://i.imgur.com/rFTrn2x.png)
What the fuck is a xe, and what the fuck is a guinea pig kin. Also, what the fuck is a headmate. I feel old.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 23, 2014, 12:59:45 am
Xe is like he/she. A galaxy doesn't really have gender so...Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.Dumber than people who say they're headmates with an entire universe? (http://i.imgur.com/rFTrn2x.png)
What the fuck is a xe, and what the fuck is a guinea pig kin. Also, what the fuck is a headmate. I feel old.
A person who thinks they are part/decended from a guinea pig?
Someone you share a head with. Like multiple personality disorder.
17, and mostly guessing. Educated guess, but still. Don't feel old.
Post by: Tiruin on September 23, 2014, 01:00:26 am
What the fuck is a xe, and what the fuck is a guinea pig kin. Also, what the fuck is a headmate. I feel old.My guesses:
xe = gender neutral third-person pronoun, unsure however as to the etymology and origin of why its spelled like such.
Guinea-pig kin = presumably like the other 'kin' types seen in the test, is possibly someone who relates that they (?~)were a guinea pig in their past life, and though in this life, remember said happenings(~?)
Headmate = Going by terminology, its a descriptor of a presiding 'thought' or 'voice' in your mind. It seems like a crude term for me.
PPE: Kal! :))
Err..waitaminute. Multiple personality disorder is real/extremely different from differing personalities or thinking... ._.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 23, 2014, 01:05:50 am
Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.Dumber than people who say they're headmates with an entire universe? (http://i.imgur.com/rFTrn2x.png)
Please tell me this is parodic.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on September 23, 2014, 01:12:34 am
PPE: Kal! :))Yeah, but that's what I thought of when I read that.
Err..waitaminute. Multiple personality disorder is real/extremely different from differing personalities or thinking... ._.
A separate person inside your head that takes over sometimes? Sounds like multiple personality disorder.
I mean, one is a galaxy, but whatever.
There probably is a better word for the post though... Anyone know it?
Post by: ~Neri on September 23, 2014, 01:19:12 am
Wat.Otherkin is literally, not figuratively and without hyperbole, the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Literally literally. The dumbest thing ever.Dumber than people who say they're headmates with an entire universe? (http://i.imgur.com/rFTrn2x.png)
Post by: Putnam on September 23, 2014, 01:28:23 am
Absolutely no idea about what's going on in the last pages or the current poll, but I took the test in the OP.
Holy shit it's almost scary. The description is totally me.
Like, down to almost every single detail.
INTJ
You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some personality weaknesses you are generally able to compensate for them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an independent thinker; and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Cold_reading
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 23, 2014, 02:17:55 am
Probably don't watch this if you're easily offended. Otherwise, watch away! It's fairly funny.
Post by: Darvi on September 23, 2014, 04:10:17 am
"nonsense," because people going around saying they're spiritually descended/whatever are the "opressed" ones.Does deciding that you're no longer part of this species count?
Post by: hops on September 23, 2014, 04:27:10 am
Post by: alexandertnt on September 23, 2014, 05:55:07 am
"nonsense," because people going around saying they're spiritually descended/whatever are the "opressed" ones.
Oh, -5 then. (how could someone think to be spiritually descended from something that doesn't even exist?).
I'm only slightly disadvantaged :). Horay!
Post by: TamerVirus on September 23, 2014, 10:04:17 am
The bottom line is that humans are terrible, and so if you're not human then you're inherently superior.
Even if you are a vampire squid?
Post by: Darvi on September 23, 2014, 10:59:20 am
Post by: martinuzz on September 23, 2014, 11:16:18 am
Post by: Darvi on September 23, 2014, 11:24:48 am
Post by: WillowLuman on September 23, 2014, 01:03:43 pm
"nonsense," because people going around saying they're spiritually descended/whatever are the "opressed" ones.Does deciding that you're no longer part of this species count?
Afraid not. Even if you find a space virus that causes you to morph into a giant centipede, you'll still have that cream filling of humanity.
As far as descent goes, I guess anyone could truthfully claim descent from reptiles, amphibians, and fish, but if you're going to go that route you might as well just admit we're all extremely aberrant cyanobacteria.
Post by: Powder Miner on October 01, 2014, 12:06:07 am
rip me q.q
Post by: birdy51 on October 01, 2014, 09:33:50 pm
This is actually false, as I fit into INFJ a lot better and I've taken tests that have indicated me thus. It's entertaining as I have friend who is ENFJ and we are like two sides to the same coin. Only, she's very, very extroverted and I just sort of bask in the radiance she exhibits.
Post by: Wimopy on October 02, 2014, 11:45:03 am
Oh, and it's highly likely that I choose answers to get Introverted on purpose, which is why I get 100% all the time. I don't feel like I can actually answer a test truthfully, only one that satisfies how I see myself and that period in time.
Post by: birdy51 on October 05, 2014, 10:46:02 pm
Quote
DandereDanderes types are the distant characters with a social aloofness. Quiet, withdrawn and timid, they remain in the shadows and rarely express themselves. They struggle to share their feelings with people, even their closest friends, which means they can sometimes be mistaken for being cold. However Danderes are anything but cold; they have soft hearts, but it just happens to be hidden behind a protective shell due to how they were treated in the past. People should take it as a major honour if a Dandere opens up to them.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Arcvasti on October 05, 2014, 10:54:00 pm
Quote from: Quizzy thang
Meganekko
The Meganekko is the girl who wears glasses. There is something about an anime character wearing glasses which gives them an odd vulnerability that people find endearing. Meganekkos are normally gentle, modest, soft-spoken people who tend to be quite shy, preferring the introverted lifestyle. They are bookish people who love to read and are very passionate about particular topics they have studied. Even if you do not own a pair of glasses, you hold the common personality traits assigned to anime girls with glasses.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Such surprise I am feeling is beyond my ability to control.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on October 06, 2014, 01:09:53 am
This is an introduction to all of the tumblr silliness, presented in a satirical manner, with some swearing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR8ADuqrGx8&list=PLXO6qZnf40NVIaiX9y4sgCvYS24H4O92v).What!?! These are real things?
Probably don't watch this if you're easily offended. Otherwise, watch away! It's fairly funny.
Humanity Fail.
Post by: Orange Wizard on October 06, 2014, 02:07:32 am
I choose to believe that they're all just massive trolls. It's just easier that way.
Post by: Lagslayer on October 08, 2014, 10:41:00 pm
For anyone wondering what the missing video is, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD-7w-LLNdw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD-7w-LLNdw)This is an introduction to all of the tumblr silliness, presented in a satirical manner, with some swearing (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR8ADuqrGx8&list=PLXO6qZnf40NVIaiX9y4sgCvYS24H4O92v).What!?! These are real things?
Probably don't watch this if you're easily offended. Otherwise, watch away! It's fairly funny.
Humanity Fail.
edit: Also, is this sort of stuff any significant portion of tumblr, or is it just blown up by everyone? I'd check myself, but it wants me to make an account, so fuck that.
Post by: WillowLuman on October 09, 2014, 12:20:41 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 09, 2014, 12:28:32 pm
There's also lots of art sharing, fandoming, and people just posting funny/interesting pictures like any other social networking site.Yep. SJWs are a fraction amongst the great deluge of homestucks, whovians, bloggers and people just sharing porn.
Post by: LordSlowpoke on October 09, 2014, 12:32:59 pm
you know to compliment the ones we already have on our own
but they have to export that
for what purpose
Post by: Orange Wizard on October 10, 2014, 09:32:42 pm
Whatever makes the most money, really.
Post by: Glloyd on October 17, 2014, 12:47:16 pm
Post by: werty892 on October 17, 2014, 05:31:23 pm
/s Not to the enlightenment part, but the shitlord part
Post by: Lagslayer on October 22, 2014, 11:04:15 pm
Confused by absolutely anything SJW or Tumblr? This will enlighten you on your terms, shitlord. (http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction/wiki/dictionary)Don't get me wrong, I know there are a lot of stupid people in the world, and that they tend to congregate if given the chance, but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to believe that these SJWs aren't just massive trolls that haven't realized that all the other trolls are trolls, yet. Or maybe it's like some sort of role playing exercise for them.
/s Not to the enlightenment part, but the shitlord part
Post by: Graknorke on October 23, 2014, 06:00:32 pm
I believe a lot of it follows any time Tumblr has conducted a "raid" (quotes deliberate) on 4chan. Namely, someone goes on Tumblr, says something stupid for a laugh, and people agree because that's how the social thing works over there apparently.Confused by absolutely anything SJW or Tumblr? This will enlighten you on your terms, shitlord. (http://www.reddit.com/r/TumblrInAction/wiki/dictionary)Don't get me wrong, I know there are a lot of stupid people in the world, and that they tend to congregate if given the chance, but I'm finding it increasingly difficult to believe that these SJWs aren't just massive trolls that haven't realized that all the other trolls are trolls, yet. Or maybe it's like some sort of role playing exercise for them.
/s Not to the enlightenment part, but the shitlord part
Post by: Eagle_eye on October 23, 2014, 07:27:33 pm
Post by: Arx on November 06, 2014, 10:59:29 am
Post by: Helgoland on November 06, 2014, 11:09:34 am
Post by: Darvi on November 06, 2014, 11:49:56 am
I know these results are bunk because I'm confirmed to be neurotypical by real, non-internet tests.
Also I just noticed that almost all of the averages, except for the one on the very bottom right, are above the so-called threshold.
Post by: IronTomato on November 06, 2014, 12:03:28 pm
Post by: Darvi on November 06, 2014, 12:04:25 pm
Post by: notquitethere on November 07, 2014, 07:42:42 am
Post by: Heron TSG on November 07, 2014, 02:10:43 pm
Post by: Arx on November 07, 2014, 02:42:05 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 08, 2014, 05:31:33 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 16, 2014, 07:52:10 pm
67% Con, 62% LibDem, 60% Lab, 58% UKIP, 44% Plaid Cymru, 30% BNP, 27% SNP. Pretty even spread with a largely liberal education, healthcare, foreign policy, environmental stance and a largely conservative economic stance.
Post by: Helgoland on November 16, 2014, 08:09:07 pm
Post by: Jervill on November 16, 2014, 08:26:18 pm
Especially being an American.
I got:
94% Labour, 88% Green, 88% LibDem, 84% SNP, 73% Plaid Cymru, BNP 25%, Con 13%, UKIP 8%.
Basically I'm left wing across the board, which isn't news.
Post by: notquitethere on November 16, 2014, 08:33:53 pm
67% Con, 62% LibDem, 60% Lab, 58% UKIP, 44% Plaid Cymru, 30% BNP, 27% SNP. Pretty even spread with a largely liberal education, healthcare, foreign policy, environmental stance and a largely conservative economic stance.I could scarcely be more different:
82% Green, 75% SNP, 70% Labour, 67% Lib Dem, 60% Plaid, 17% BNP, 13% UKIP and, drum roll... 3% Conservative.
94% LabourThat's pretty high. What didn't you agree with?
Post by: Gnorm on November 16, 2014, 08:38:42 pm
88% UK Independence
69% British Nationals
33% Labour
28% Liberal Democrats
19% Scottish Nationals
13% Plaid Cymru
2% Green
Post by: Jervill on November 16, 2014, 08:41:11 pm
67% Con, 62% LibDem, 60% Lab, 58% UKIP, 44% Plaid Cymru, 30% BNP, 27% SNP. Pretty even spread with a largely liberal education, healthcare, foreign policy, environmental stance and a largely conservative economic stance.I could scarcely be more different:
82% Green, 75% SNP, 70% Labour, 67% Lib Dem, 60% Plaid, 17% BNP, 13% UKIP and, drum roll... 3% Conservative.94% LabourThat's pretty high. What didn't you agree with?
From the looks of it, marijuana legalization. I did put that as least important though because I just don't give a damn about that "issue".
Post by: notquitethere on November 16, 2014, 08:54:37 pm
90% ConservativeAh, so your username is short for Gnorman Tebbit.
88% UK Independence
69% British Nationals
From the looks of it, marijuana legalization. I did put that as least important though because I just don't give a damn about that "issue".It's a bigger issue in USA: 51% of the Federal prison population is in on drug offences (and the country locks up a bigger portion of its population than any other country) compared to about 14% of the British prison population. As well as the drugs thing, I think Labour's too protectionist in its immigration policy. Immigrants tend to create jobs, immigration policy shouldn't be dictated by fear of the other etc..
Post by: FearfulJesuit on November 16, 2014, 09:36:45 pm
I'm heavily in favor of making immigration less restrictive for skilled workers, but I'm not so sure about unskilled. (As a member of the upper-middle class who would love to be an expat at some point in his life, that's unsurprising.)
Post by: Remuthra on November 16, 2014, 10:04:23 pm
Liberal Democrats: 79%, Labour: 72%, Green: 66%, UK Independence: 60%, Scottish National: 57%, Plaid Cymru: 37%, British National: 37%, Conservative: 36%
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on November 16, 2014, 10:13:07 pm
Edit: Never mind. Just my tablet being dumb.
Post by: Remuthra on November 16, 2014, 10:13:31 pm
Post by: Gentlefish on November 16, 2014, 10:16:02 pm
Right where I would expect me to be, honestly.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on November 16, 2014, 10:20:37 pm
I started it but got confused after the first six questions.Well, there is an american one...
I have no idea what politics in the UK are like.
I got 90% for everything but conservative. 33% conservative.
Post by: Remuthra on November 16, 2014, 11:07:53 pm
Green: 82%, Democrat: 78%, Libertarian: 78%, Constitution: 61%, Socialist: 59%, Republican: 43%, Conservative: 41%
Since when has the US had both a Republican and a Conservative Party?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 16, 2014, 11:28:03 pm
Any way, here's What If MSH Was A Redcoat: I side with Green on most political issues.
76% Green, 72% Labour, 65% Scottish Nationals, 63% Plaid Cymru, 63% Liberal Democrats, 20% British Nationals, 10% Conservatives
Oh god, I side with BNP 10% more than the Tories. Poor Tories, how you have fallen from grace. Remember the good old days where you regularly accused the liberals of being traitors to the crown, nobody else had any representation, and it was you had utter dominance of all things political? Whatever happened to that? Whatever happened to tearing down orphanages and enslaving the now homeless orphans in your fish canning factory because that's what God wanted? Or basing all policy on Tradition and Country because that's how things were done! You could have at least kept the hats and walking canes!
Post by: Gnorm on November 17, 2014, 02:27:22 am
95% Republican
91% Conservative
85% Constitution
56% Libertarian
5% Democrat
1% Socialist
0% Green
Post by: LordSlowpoke on November 17, 2014, 04:50:04 am
i agree with fucking everyone
ayyyyyy
unless it's bonus murrica edition:
Green: 91%, Democrat: 90%, Socialist: 65%, Libertarian: 39%, Constitution: 17%, Conservative: 13%, Republican: 7%
Post by: Culise on November 17, 2014, 11:32:57 am
LibDem: 78%
Green: 69%
Labour: 67%
SNP: 63%
Conservative: 62%
Plaid Cymru: 46%
UKIP: 33%
BNP: 23%
US:
Green: 87%
Democrats: 84%
Libertarians: 62%
Socialist: 41%
Constitution: 36%
Republican: 36%
Conservative: 31%
Since when has the US had both a Republican and a Conservative Party?I haven't the foggiest. I found an American Conservative Party in 2008 and a Conservative Party of New York State, which is apparently a remnant of a greater Conservative party that hasn't existed outside New York for decades. Other than that, nada.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 17, 2014, 01:57:10 pm
Conservative: 90%
Republicans: 90%
Constitution Party: 90%
Libertarians: 86%
Green Party: 19%
Democrats: 15%
Socialist: 9%
MAXIMUM FREEDOM
Post by: Gentlefish on November 17, 2014, 02:47:06 pm
USA:
Conservative: 90%
Republicans: 90%
Constitution Party: 90%
Libertarians: 86%
Green Party: 19%
Democrats: 15%
Socialist: 9%
MAXIMUM FREEDOM
You gamed the system didn't you.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 17, 2014, 05:15:42 pm
Post by: Helgoland on November 17, 2014, 06:04:41 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 17, 2014, 06:10:34 pm
Post by: Jervill on November 17, 2014, 06:10:56 pm
98% Green
95% Dems
79% Socialist
23% Libertarians(<-Foreign Policy only, basically).
02% GOP.
Post by: Helgoland on November 17, 2014, 06:15:00 pm
Santorum is mouthwashI sincerely hope you do not wash your mouth with santorum. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_for_%22santorum%22_neologism)
Post by: Darvi on November 17, 2014, 06:27:59 pm
Post by: Culise on November 17, 2014, 09:31:03 pm
Doesn't Santorum leave a bad taste in people's mouth?It's not his fault you can't stand the taste of L I B E R T Y. :P
Post by: Remuthra on November 17, 2014, 09:35:25 pm
Post by: Culise on November 17, 2014, 09:44:20 pm
Post by: Remuthra on November 17, 2014, 09:46:46 pm
Post by: Jervill on November 17, 2014, 09:52:04 pm
Did you not listen to Captain Jean-Luc Picard?
:P
Post by: Lagslayer on November 17, 2014, 10:12:54 pm
No, no, no. U.S. is Red, White, Blue. France is Blue, White, Red.France confirmed for Bizarro USA.
Did you not listen to Captain Jean-Luc Picard?
:P
Hmm...
Post by: alexandertnt on November 18, 2014, 05:33:15 am
91% Labour
87% Scottish Nationals
86% Liberal Democrats
83% Green
81% Plaid Cymru
23% British Nationals
15% Conservatives
10% UK independence
US:
95% Green Party
93% Democrats
62% Socialist
46% Libertarian (This was higher than I thought it would have been)
15% Constitution Party
5% Conservative Party
1% Republican Party (Take that :P)
Post by: Remuthra on November 18, 2014, 02:43:24 pm
This was higher than I thought it would have beenProbably because libertarianism=/=Ayn Rand :P.
Post by: Flying Dice on November 19, 2014, 12:58:33 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 12:59:51 am
Post by: Flying Dice on November 19, 2014, 01:03:35 am
Post by: AlleeCat on November 19, 2014, 01:04:11 am
Quote
Your privilege level is Extremely Oppressed with a score of -905Ayup...
Post by: Arcvasti on November 19, 2014, 01:10:00 am
Spoiler: D & D testy thing (click to show/hide)
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 19, 2014, 01:11:18 am
Post by: Arcvasti on November 19, 2014, 01:14:14 am
So many sunglasses.Dammit auto-emote-correct. On further reflection, that's hilarious. 8)
Post by: Tiruin on November 19, 2014, 01:16:29 am
Literally the third time that test was posted.We need more tests. And that speaks for the international community too...
._.
Tests please! :D
Post by: WillowLuman on November 19, 2014, 01:35:18 am
Post by: Putnam on November 19, 2014, 01:47:08 am
Apparently I'm a super-aspie (http://www.aspietests.org/raads/questions.php?show=f96a869e44291&locale=en_GB).
I know these results are bunk because I'm confirmed to be neurotypical by real, non-internet tests.
Also I just noticed that almost all of the averages, except for the one on the very bottom right, are above the so-called threshold.
Neurotypical as hell is what I got.
Take that, 3rd-grade teacher.
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 19, 2014, 02:16:41 am
This good? (http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339)I think they need more questions. The results didn't match me at all.
Post by: Culise on November 19, 2014, 10:56:08 am
Shit, we topical now? (http://www.easydamus.com/character.html)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'd prefer to think of myself as Good rather than Neutral, since the two are tied, but either way, I suppose. They really shouldn't have chosen a number of questions for the Good/Evil axis or the Law/Chaos axis that's a multiple of 2, 3, or both, though.
Post by: Baffler on November 19, 2014, 11:38:59 am
Labour: 74%
Plaid Cymru: 64%
SNP: 64%
Liberal Democrats: 61%
BNP: 39%
UKIP: 39%
Conservatives: 3%
I'm not sure how to interpret these results.
-----
For the D&D one,
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
This sounds about right.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 19, 2014, 01:17:03 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Evil is a no, everything else an even spread.
Post by: WillowLuman on November 19, 2014, 01:47:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 19, 2014, 01:50:21 pm
Post by: Darvi on November 19, 2014, 01:50:46 pm
Post by: Sirus on November 19, 2014, 01:55:33 pm
Shit, we topical now? (http://www.easydamus.com/character.html)Wish there was a "both" option for #45. We should treat animals well, sure, but some of them are in fact quite tasty! :P
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Arx on November 19, 2014, 02:08:36 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Damn do I seem suboptimal. At least the quiz didn't triple cross-class me to wizard, although it would be fun.
Post by: AlleeCat on November 19, 2014, 02:22:05 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 02:31:17 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Alright, I accept the Ritvo test (http://www.aspietests.org/raads/questions.php). Anything to stop going over the same D&D test again.
Total score
118.0
Language
4.0
Social relatedness
53.0
Sensory/motor
41.0
Circumscribed interests
20.0
Like with the first spectrum disorder test I end up in vague-land, where I exceed all the thresholds but otherwise am far below the average for even suspected ASD. Except on sensory, where I far exceed it. Strange. It's a good thing internet tests are bullshit, or I could end up worried that I have a mental disorder.
Post by: Caz on November 19, 2014, 02:46:48 pm
Language 3.0
Social relatedness 59.0
Sensory/motor 15.0
Circumscribed interests 6.0
did i win?
Post by: Dutchling on November 19, 2014, 03:06:29 pm
Survey was not as much fun as I first thought :<
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on November 19, 2014, 03:35:57 pm
Or a sometimes option?
Total - 48
Language - 3
Social Relatedness - 23
Sensory/Motor - 17
Circumscribed Interests - 5
Post by: WillowLuman on November 19, 2014, 03:49:45 pm
Ain't that the truth. Probably wouldn't have gotten multiclassed to Druid if I'd picked the other choice, but it seemed like a choice between two extremes, so I went for the one I thought wasn't going to be interpreted as arbitrarily mean.Shit, we topical now? (http://www.easydamus.com/character.html)Wish there was a "both" option for #45. We should treat animals well, sure, but some of them are in fact quite tasty! :P
Mental Health Test: Might we pick a different one? This one seems to require creating an account.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 03:57:50 pm
Post by: TD1 on November 19, 2014, 04:13:36 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on November 19, 2014, 04:16:02 pm
Quote
I keep my thoughts stacked in my memory like they are on filing cards, and I pick out the ones I need by looking through the stack and finding the right one (or other unique way).
That question is extremely confusing.
The numbers, what do they mean? (http://www.aspietests.org/raads/questions.php?show=05b44ba545497&locale=en_GB)
Total score 47.0 Language 5.0 Social relatedness 32.0 Sensory/motor 3.0 Circumscribed interests 7.0
Post by: Frogging101 on November 19, 2014, 04:17:14 pm
Language - 14.0
Social Relatedness - 64.0
Sensory/Motor - 26.0
Circumscribed interests - 20.0
Yeah I have no idea what these numbers mean. I guess it's explained in the linked research paper.
EDIT: It's worth noting I guess that I have been professionally diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 04:20:12 pm
Post by: Culise on November 19, 2014, 04:20:34 pm
Total: 152.0 (threshold 65)
Language: 8.0 (threshold 4)
Social Relatedness: 88.0 (threshold 31)
Sensory/motor: 32.0 (threshold 16)
Circumscribed interests: 24.0 (threshold 15)
Question 46 was a bit odd. Isn't it always true? After all, 0C in the winter feels balmy, but 0C in the summer feels (literally) freezing cold. Same with 54, though we usually call it "society". Mind you, I already know I don't have it.
I interpreted it as asking if you visualize your thoughts and memories in a "unique", or particularly rigorous or logical way. As for the numbers, they're basically scaling how typical your behaviour is for Asperger's.QuoteI keep my thoughts stacked in my memory like they are on filing cards, and I pick out the ones I need by looking through the stack and finding the right one (or other unique way).
That question is extremely confusing.
Post by: notquitethere on November 19, 2014, 04:25:21 pm
Post by: Culise on November 19, 2014, 04:29:48 pm
The poll doesn't have 'none' as an option... this seems like an oversight.Not to mention that if all four of your specific areas exceed the thresholds, I'm pretty sure it's rather impossible for the total to not exceed the threshold as well.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on November 19, 2014, 04:49:24 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 05:35:01 pm
Aw damnit.The poll doesn't have 'none' as an option... this seems like an oversight.Not to mention that if all four of your specific areas exceed the thresholds, I'm pretty sure it's rather impossible for the total to not exceed the threshold as well.
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 05:59:11 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Graknorke on November 19, 2014, 06:17:42 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
...high wisdom score? Ah shit. Forgive me, Crime Squad.
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 06:27:34 pm
It says that your Wisdom is 11, though. You're probably fine with Charisma 12. The LCS won't bang on your door soon.
Probably.
Post by: Vector on November 19, 2014, 06:38:43 pm
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 06:40:16 pm
Wot.
Post by: BadLemonsXI on November 19, 2014, 06:42:02 pm
D&D quiz, because I don't feel like signing up for the other one:You don't need to sign up just don't fill that bit in.
Ritvo Autism (http://www.aspietests.org/raads/questions.php?show=9b4a9a3d45518&locale=en_GB)
Total score:93.0
Language:7.0
Social relatedness:65.0
Sensory/motor:10.0
Circumscribed interests:11.0
Post by: Vector on November 19, 2014, 06:43:53 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 06:46:20 pm
Certain points of view would suggest that diligence is the actual measure of intelligence.... my INT score is higher than Vector's.
Wot.
I've said it repeatedly: I'm not that smart. I'm just really, really diligent.
Regardless, I think True Neutral Monk is a perfect fit for you.
Post by: Cheeetar on November 19, 2014, 07:29:16 pm
Total score : 27
Language : 3
Social relatedness : 20
Sensory/motor : 4
Circumscribed interests : 0
Post by: Xantalos on November 19, 2014, 07:43:41 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Caz on November 19, 2014, 07:47:13 pm
Spoiler: D&D quiz (click to show/hide)
got "chaotic evil". uhm... O_o
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 07:57:22 pm
Unless you do it stupid evil. Then you're a terrible person.
Post by: BadLemonsXI on November 19, 2014, 08:01:01 pm
Spoiler: D&D quiz (click to show/hide)
Ha and I got the Chaotic Good. . . O_o
Post by: Caz on November 19, 2014, 08:04:12 pm
Ha and I got the Chaotic Good. . . O_o
One point away from CE, as well. :P
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 08:06:33 pm
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on November 19, 2014, 08:08:02 pm
But I can't copy paste on this stupid tablet.
Post by: Tiruin on November 19, 2014, 09:09:19 pm
Shit, we topical now? (http://www.easydamus.com/character.html)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Edit: Why can't I triple-class?! :I
I got a weird one, definitely. Paladin/sorceror? How does that work?This isn't a D&D combination?
I don't know much about D&D...
[...]Ritvo test (http://www.aspietests.org/raads/questions.php).[...]Bloop! (http://www.aspietests.org/raads/questions.php?show=2feedfd145542&locale=en_GB)
Hee ^^Certain points of view would suggest that diligence is the actual measure of intelligence.... my INT score is higher than Vector's.
Wot.
I've said it repeatedly: I'm not that smart. I'm just really, really diligent.
Regardless, I think True Neutral Monk is a perfect fit for you.
Conventional meaning of smart. :P
Vector, you're smart. Going by multiple intelligence. Diligence is how you show it.
(also IQ may shift quite a lot depending on how you do the tests--though there being parallel tests makes the % error a lot lesser...reminds me of what I did -.- yay duality of thinking!)
Post by: Gentlefish on November 19, 2014, 09:13:39 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 09:15:27 pm
Post by: Vector on November 19, 2014, 09:16:36 pm
Post by: Skyrunner on November 19, 2014, 09:21:21 pm
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 09:25:42 pm
My IQ is 147... not shabby in the conventional intelligence department. I'm just saying that if I tried to think about the one thing I have more of than most people, it's that I constantly try to improve and am very sensitive to my environment--definitely not anything else. Honestly, I'm even a bit of a slow learner. I don't grasp new concepts very quickly without asking a lot of questions.Huh, really? Not too far from what a large number of internet tests averaged together tell me mine is. I forget the exact number, but it's in that neighborhood.
This kind of information is fun to share.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on November 19, 2014, 09:29:24 pm
Post by: Jervill on November 19, 2014, 09:32:35 pm
Strength- 8
Dexterity- 13
Constitution- 13
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 13
Charisma- 9
Not surprising considering my day job (county intern/book keeper). Neutral barely beat out Good.
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 09:36:41 pm
Post by: Skyrunner on November 19, 2014, 09:37:27 pm
Post by: Vector on November 19, 2014, 09:39:08 pm
Post by: Gentlefish on November 19, 2014, 09:39:13 pm
Post by: Tiruin on November 19, 2014, 09:40:18 pm
Though that test was taken when I was twelve, with some indications that it was for 16 year olds and above due to the testing measures in my community.
Not shabby is an understatement :ISo yeah. This.
It's a usual fluid number though it shows a general range of where you could classify yourself though. :P
In regard to age--it shows development rather than a hard point to hold yourself from.
The natural kind :DIs there triple-classing in D&D?
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 19, 2014, 09:43:53 pm
Spoiler: DnD results are in... (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on November 19, 2014, 09:45:44 pm
My IQ is 147...According to XKCD, that makes you just another average internet user.
When I got tested I got 148, which irked me to no end because it was so close to a nice, round number like 150.
I remember the results from my last DnD test. CN human sorceror.
Post by: Tawa on November 19, 2014, 09:51:15 pm
When I got tested I got 148, which irked me to no end because it was so close to a nice, round number like 150.Darvi confirmed for Monk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Monk).
Post by: birdy51 on November 19, 2014, 09:54:13 pm
Spoiler: DnD Class (click to show/hide)
On a side note, here's a another test that my friend had sent me. It is Homestuck related and a bit on the sillier side, but it's kind of interesting.
Homestuck Class Quiz (https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/rvalle/hsquiz/hsquiz.html)
Spoiler: Sylph of Breath (click to show/hide)
Post by: Gentlefish on November 19, 2014, 09:58:19 pm
Post by: SquatchHammer on November 19, 2014, 10:27:49 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: 4maskwolf on November 19, 2014, 10:45:22 pm
Spoiler: I'm lawful? (click to show/hide)
Watch out, Caz. Justice WILL find you, and it will be my hand that does it :P
Post by: Vector on November 19, 2014, 11:09:35 pm
Post by: notquitethere on November 19, 2014, 11:30:17 pm
Neutral Good Half-Elf Druid (3rd Level)
Ability Scores:
Strength- 13
Dexterity- 15
Constitution- 14
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 14
Charisma- 14
Post by: 4maskwolf on November 19, 2014, 11:38:52 pm
I did that D&D test a little while back. I made a note of the results:That's a nice, even stat spread you've got yourself.
Neutral Good Half-Elf Druid (3rd Level)
Ability Scores:
Strength- 13
Dexterity- 15
Constitution- 14
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 14
Charisma- 14
Post by: Cheeetar on November 19, 2014, 11:39:49 pm
Spoiler: Sylph of Breath (click to show/hide)
Post by: notquitethere on November 19, 2014, 11:48:18 pm
Spoiler: Page of Space (click to show/hide)
Post by: 4maskwolf on November 19, 2014, 11:55:53 pm
Post by: notquitethere on November 19, 2014, 11:58:21 pm
Why thank you. Just like in real life, I have no dump stats.I did that D&D test a little while back. I made a note of the results:That's a nice, even stat spread you've got yourself.
Neutral Good Half-Elf Druid (3rd Level)
Ability Scores:
Strength- 13
Dexterity- 15
Constitution- 14
Intelligence- 14
Wisdom- 14
Charisma- 14
Post by: Tiruin on November 20, 2014, 12:03:01 am
Homestuck Class Quiz (https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/user/rvalle/hsquiz/hsquiz.html)I have no idea what the rest of the questions mean ._.
Also my browser (public PC) saw the...website as potentially harmful.
Quote
You are the Sylph of Hope!
Sylphs are healers, and bring health to teammates through the use of their aspect. They work best by interacting with others, and are often skilled at resolving conflicts.
Hope players have control over holy magic, which takes the form of white beams of light (or similar, depending on their class). They may also have a deeper control over the hope of others. Heroes of Hope tend to be very eager, though their actions can be foolish and fatalistic.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on November 20, 2014, 12:34:56 am
Quote
You are the Sylph of Heart!
Sylphs are healers, and bring health to teammates through the use of their aspect. They work best by interacting with others, and are often skilled at resolving conflicts.
Heart players have a deep understanding of the self, and are said to have powers over the essence of being. They tend to be empathetic, even if they don't outwardly reveal it. A Heart player's journey of self-exploration often leads to the splintering and branching of their personality, which can be manifested through anything as complex as full duplicates of the self or as simple as a purrfound love of role-play.
Now if only I knew what anything in Homestuck was...
Post by: NAV on November 20, 2014, 10:02:41 am
Spoiler: HOLY DFHJDFSDHT ANOTHER SORCERER (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on November 20, 2014, 10:15:18 am
Post by: Uristides on November 20, 2014, 11:07:16 am
Spoiler: True Neutral Human Wizard (2nd Level) (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on November 20, 2014, 11:11:23 am
Kidding on that last one; I at least know of Homestuck, though I'm not really interested in it. I just like quizzes.
Spoiler: Page of Breath (click to show/hide)
Post by: Criptfeind on November 20, 2014, 11:23:27 am
Spoiler: Rogue of Time (click to show/hide)
That seems like it would be a amazing support class. Being able to steal time from enemies and give to to allies. Also the whole time travel thing in general is pretty cool. Cool.
Post by: Wwolin on November 20, 2014, 01:43:25 pm
Spoiler: Oh boy, multiclassing (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on November 20, 2014, 04:32:21 pm
Spoiler: Neutral Evil Human Druid/Ranger (1st/1st Level) (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lyeos on November 20, 2014, 04:58:28 pm
Spoiler: Hmm. (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Homestuck Junk (click to show/hide)
Post by: kaenneth on November 20, 2014, 05:11:55 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Arcvasti on November 20, 2014, 05:16:42 pm
Spoiler: Results of Homestuck quiz (click to show/hide)
That's about what I expected.
Post by: TD1 on November 21, 2014, 01:18:29 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Wimopy on November 23, 2014, 09:52:50 am
Spoiler: Heir of Mind (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: UK Politics (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: D'n'D (click to show/hide)
LibDem Sorceror. I have no idea what that Homestuck thing was, but Heir of Mind sounds pretty awesome.
Post by: Graknorke on November 23, 2014, 10:18:13 am
Spoiler: Politics (click to show/hide)
Post by: Uristides on November 23, 2014, 11:48:09 am
I'm not that well versed in UK politics, but does that make you a Heir of Mind that supports inheritance tax?Spoiler: Heir of Mind (click to show/hide)Spoiler: UK Politics (click to show/hide)Spoiler: D'n'D (click to show/hide)
LibDem Sorceror. I have no idea what that Homestuck thing was, but Heir of Mind sounds pretty awesome.
Post by: notquitethere on November 23, 2014, 12:54:40 pm
I'm not that well versed in UK politics, but does that make you a Heir of Mind that supports inheritance tax?I feel like this is the set up to a pun. Something like, Inheritance taxing? More like Heir in trance attack scene!
Post by: Arx on November 23, 2014, 12:56:16 pm
Post by: TD1 on November 23, 2014, 01:23:57 pm
Post by: Arx on November 23, 2014, 01:27:33 pm
https://uk.isidewith.com/political-quiz
Right here.
Post by: TD1 on November 23, 2014, 01:35:16 pm
Time for Grak to pour hatred and scorn on me:
UKIP 70%
Conservative 68%
Post by: Graknorke on November 23, 2014, 01:57:38 pm
Ah, thanks.(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f7/Greekfire-madridskylitzes1.jpg)
Time for Grak to pour hatred and scorn on me:
UKIP 70%
Conservative 68%
What didst thou just spake of me, thou dog? Know this, knave, I am the best sword in the fleets of Sir Francis Drake, and I hath partaken in numerous raids ‘pon the ports of Spain and hath carried off over three hundred Doubloons! I am trained in musket warfare and am the best shot in the militias of His Majesty! Thou art nothing to me but another target. I shalt strike thee down with all the furies of the Heavens above and Hells below, of a sort not yet seen on this Earth. Thou thinkest that ye can slander me, naught consequence? Thou art mistaken. For as we speak, I am contacting my spies and friends cross’t the breadth of old England to locate thou, so thou best prepare for mine storm, ye cowardly poltroon. A divine storm that shalt wipe out ye pathetic existence. Thou art but food for mine dogs, for I canst be anwhere at any time, and I canst kill thou in over seven hundred ways with naught but mine sword and buckler. Nay, not only am I extensively trained in the arts of unarmed combat, but I hath also access to the entire arsenals of His Majesty’s militias. I shalt use it to its full extent to wipe thine miserable body of the face of Our Lord’s Earth, ye dog. Alas, if only thou had knownst what unholy retribution thine libels were about to bring down on thee, mayhap thou wouldst have kept silent. But thou did not, and now thou shalt pay the price, ye Godforsaken dogsbody. I shalt shit fury down from the Heavens ‘pon thou, and thou shalt drown in it. Confess, and prepare to meet thine maker, sirrah.
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 25, 2014, 01:28:31 pm
Peasants knoweth I'm elite in guerrilla warfare
I've kill'd three-hundr'd batches of jacobites
Thou miniscule cover'd bitch
I've kill'd three-hundr'd batches of jacobites
Thou miniscule cover'd bitch
Post by: TD1 on November 25, 2014, 01:32:10 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 25, 2014, 01:35:32 pm
Post by: Heron TSG on November 25, 2014, 05:22:57 pm
Spoiler: Dungeons and Dragons (click to show/hide)
Apparently I'm a Paladin in a vast sea of wizards and sorcerers. Looks like those were my next two closest. :P If the test had it, I'd probably be a Knight instead, since they can be any kind of Lawful (not just Lawful Good) and they don't have to be religious. (I am very not-religious.) It would also make more use of my stats, really.
Post by: Graknorke on November 25, 2014, 05:49:38 pm
Hello brother.Spoiler: Dungeons and Dragons (click to show/hide)
Apparently I'm a Paladin in a vast sea of wizards and sorcerers. Looks like those were my next two closest. :P If the test had it, I'd probably be a Knight instead, since they can be any kind of Lawful (not just Lawful Good) and they don't have to be religious. (I am very not-religious.) It would also make more use of my stats, really.
Let us start the "lawful neutral human paladin" club.
Post by: WillowLuman on November 25, 2014, 06:35:25 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SquatchHammer on November 25, 2014, 07:32:40 pm
Post by: Jervill on November 25, 2014, 08:16:04 pm
As an American... I apparently am fully in step with the Scottish nationals party at 76%....
Build 10 more Woad Raiders.
Post by: AlleeCat on November 25, 2014, 08:17:49 pm
Kael? Is that you?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 26, 2014, 01:36:12 pm
I AGREE, HUMBLY!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: aenri on December 06, 2014, 11:17:36 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Uristides on December 07, 2014, 09:01:18 am
I've got:
You scored a total of 36
Inattention Subscale: 22
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 14
Post by: Remuthra on December 07, 2014, 09:32:04 am
Inattention Subscale: 12
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 6
I cannot ADD.
Post by: TD1 on December 07, 2014, 10:14:26 am
Inattention Subscale: 10
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 11
Post by: Darvi on December 07, 2014, 10:58:30 am
Inattention Subscale: 24
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 10
I knew that I was an inattentive fuck.
I also knew that I don't have ADHD so whatev'.
Post by: Remuthra on December 07, 2014, 11:04:48 am
Post by: Tiruin on December 07, 2014, 11:13:35 am
ADHD test (http://psychcentral.com/addquiz.htm).
Considering the fact that it is possible to be diagnosed with ADHD with both subcategories in the lowest bracket, I'd say the test lacks validity a bit :P.That's...a bit of an understatement. :P
Tests like these usually should have an accompanying interview for processing instead of...well, things like these, which are individually processed (I mean, they're usually used and then taken for processing and...words are messy. Argh.)
Considering the way the questions were made (general scenarios over an determined time span with different recalled situations // set in a broad timespan), it really comes to me that such a test was made for such a need--the accompanying processing instead of individual conclusion right after taking the test ._.
You scored a total of 15
Inattention Subscale: 8
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 7
Hopefully y'all didn't miss that one disclaimer to the side:
Quote
This is not meant
as a diagnosis tool.
Only a health or mental health professional can make a diagnosis of ADHD.
Post by: Orange Wizard on December 07, 2014, 12:48:04 pm
Inattention Subscale: 11
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 2
...
Huh.
Post by: Wimopy on December 07, 2014, 12:58:47 pm
Inattention Subscale: 13
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 4
Practically the same as Orange Wizard above me, +2 for each. Definitely don't have ADD/ADHD though, not even on the level the test says. Goes to show how reliable they can be.
Post by: Arx on December 07, 2014, 01:49:49 pm
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 9
Pfft. I'd be inclined to say you're more likely to have a problem if you didn't answer 'Rarely' to almost all of the question.
Post by: Graknorke on December 07, 2014, 07:03:30 pm
Post by: uber pye on December 07, 2014, 07:17:01 pm
Inattention Subscale: 15
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 10
Post by: Vector on December 07, 2014, 11:30:21 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on December 08, 2014, 01:11:24 am
Inattention Subscale: 18
Hyperactivity/Impulsivity Subscale: 4
I am the Nutty Professor, not ADHD.
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on January 18, 2015, 09:19:43 am
I just discovered that I'm cheese D;
This quiz was just a cheesy (no pun intended) example. Does anyone have a good quiz?
Post by: Wimopy on January 18, 2015, 11:42:29 am
I doubt that was a surprise, but yeah, seems like we're running out of random quizes, however unlikely it seems.
Post by: Uristides on January 18, 2015, 11:59:43 am
We need to get this up and running again, so here's the are you cheese quiz? (http://www.buzzfeed.com/alennon/are-you-cheese)
I just discovered that I'm cheese D;
This quiz was just a cheesy (no pun intended) example. Does anyone have a good quiz?
Quote
You got: Nope. You ain’t no cheese.Oh well, my self-discovery journey continues
This is by no means a good quiz, but I found the idea(and the fact that this site is now doing teenager-girl-magazine tier quizzes) so funny I couldn't resist: Which greek muse are you? (http://www.historyoftheancientworld.com/2014/12/greek-muse/)
I'm apparently Calliope, not fabulous enough.
Post by: TD1 on January 18, 2015, 12:24:53 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on January 18, 2015, 12:29:55 pm
Spoiler: Erato (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on January 18, 2015, 12:30:28 pm
You're Aphrodite XD
Post by: Arx on January 18, 2015, 12:33:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
How did you get my results?! I hadn't linked them yet! :P
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on January 18, 2015, 12:33:57 pm
Hahahahahaha.Aphrodite and Erato are quite different. Aphrodite is the goddess of love and shit, while I'm just some crazy lady who likes to write fanfics.
You're Aphrodite XD
Post by: Wimopy on January 18, 2015, 02:12:38 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
How did you get my results?! I hadn't linked them yet! :P
Ditto.
I found the lack of a Science class option disappointing, but I actually liked both parts of most dual options.
Also, I found the female aspirations alien, but I guess that has acceptable implications.
Post by: Remuthra on January 18, 2015, 02:17:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Vector on January 18, 2015, 02:23:11 pm
Post by: Wimopy on January 18, 2015, 02:37:52 pm
I also got Calliope.
BTW, they aren't "female aspirations," they're "Ancient Greek Myth aspirations" 9_9
My most sincere apologies in that case. I did not realise that giving birth is a mythical aspiration, not inherently one of females. (That's 2 out of 4 options covered, I believe)
By the way, is there a better word instead of female that also covers the entire gender, including all age groups? I can't think of any right now.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on January 18, 2015, 02:43:21 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
How nice.
Post by: Vector on January 18, 2015, 02:44:53 pm
Post by: Frumple on January 18, 2015, 02:48:32 pm
Also I got the purple one. Only thing that mattered~
Post by: Wimopy on January 18, 2015, 03:02:53 pm
Still, I doubt I would be a good Greek god/muse, so no matter how we look at it, it's okay that I found the answers alien.
Post by: TD1 on January 18, 2015, 03:10:09 pm
Though yeah, when it comes to giving birth to monsters, that's pretty much a gender-neutral thing when it comes to mythology. Plenty of dudes popped out some snarly critters in ancient legends, as did ladies and things-without-gender.
Also I got the purple one. Only thing that mattered~
Kronos, for instance, gave birth to Aphrodite.
Well...sort of. His blood fell into the ocean, and when they joined Aphrodite was born.
...
Maybe that means the sea was her mother?
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on January 18, 2015, 03:18:07 pm
My greek teacher always told me that Aphrodite was born when Zeus chopped off one of his father's (Kronos) testicles, which then fell into the sea.Though yeah, when it comes to giving birth to monsters, that's pretty much a gender-neutral thing when it comes to mythology. Plenty of dudes popped out some snarly critters in ancient legends, as did ladies and things-without-gender.
Also I got the purple one. Only thing that mattered~
Kronos, for instance, gave birth to Aphrodite.
Well...sort of. His blood fell into the ocean, and when they joined Aphrodite was born.
...
Maybe that means the sea was her mother?
Post by: Wimopy on January 18, 2015, 03:33:38 pm
Also, an impregnated sea wouldn't be the first one - see Kalevala. (Although Greeks were probably first)
Generally though, you do require a male and a female (wanted to say god and goddess, but that's too specific) to produce offspring. Be it Uranus - Gaia, Cronus - Rhea or Zeus - Anything that moves and is a she.
I can't actually think of any non-heterosexual births besides Chaos -> all.
As for Aphrodite: Wiki has two versions, it can be agreed that Greek mythology is multiple-choice, not definite. I remembered the daughter of Zeus version.
Post by: Remuthra on January 18, 2015, 03:37:02 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on January 19, 2015, 05:22:49 am
...
Spoiler: "You can't be two things" (click to show/hide)
Post by: Gentlefish on January 19, 2015, 06:08:15 am
I though Aphrodite was born when the one guy jizzed in the ocean? Or was that Venus? Crap, I can't remember. It's been too long since I studied Greek myth.
...Spoiler: "You can't be two things" (click to show/hide)
Zeus cut off Kronos' genitalia and threw them into the ocean where the floated around for a while before getting eaten by a clam. Then Aphrodite emerged, a transformation of his junk into a literal Goddess of Passion and Fertility.
Post by: Remuthra on January 19, 2015, 08:39:31 am
I though Aphrodite was born when the one guy jizzed in the ocean? Or was that Venus? Crap, I can't remember. It's been too long since I studied Greek myth.Venus = = Aphrodite
...Spoiler: "You can't be two things" (click to show/hide)
Post by: sjm9876 on January 19, 2015, 08:47:49 am
Post by: Remuthra on January 19, 2015, 08:49:13 am
Then again, the way religion worked at the time, every deity was an equivalent to another in a different culture, eh?
Post by: sjm9876 on January 19, 2015, 08:55:00 am
when the one guy jizzed in the oceanand Aphrodite due to the castration.
But yeah, functionally identical.
Post by: Graknorke on January 19, 2015, 05:26:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lyeos on January 19, 2015, 10:45:53 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on January 20, 2015, 01:36:30 am
Post by: Helgoland on January 20, 2015, 05:16:24 am
Post by: Culise on January 20, 2015, 10:59:20 am
Spoiler: Calliope (click to show/hide)
Post by: Remuthra on January 20, 2015, 02:33:06 pm
Nobody else got Urania?Apparently not. Nobody else is space-muse worthy.
Post by: Orange Wizard on January 20, 2015, 10:07:56 pm
Post by: TD1 on January 20, 2015, 10:43:45 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on January 21, 2015, 02:30:09 am
Spoiler: These two sound fun to hang around (click to show/hide)
Post by: Helgoland on January 21, 2015, 11:31:40 am
Sadly, I've yet to find the arse worthy of being my muse.I know some pretty muse-worthy arses. The women they're attached to are nice as well, which really helps with the former.
Post by: TD1 on January 21, 2015, 02:11:56 pm
*Nods head in Helgo's direction*
That aside, I've only known a few muse-worthy arses, but most of them were attached to people who knew they had them and weren't very kind people as a result.
Post by: McMagma on January 21, 2015, 05:50:19 pm
Spoiler: INTP (click to show/hide)
Post by: Eagle_eye on January 22, 2015, 10:18:36 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Arcvasti on January 22, 2015, 11:20:09 pm
Completely unsurprising... and depressing. Goddamn sellouts.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm not precisely on anybodies side, because no one is precisely on my side.
Post by: TD1 on January 23, 2015, 05:59:35 pm
(http://www.quickmeme.com/img/ce/ced87af946f4f85e81db0640fd8fe89e16e406467e3beaec4970077cbb1283cf.jpg)
Post by: Tawa on January 23, 2015, 06:02:31 pm
I am.Nobody else got Urania?Apparently not. Nobody else is space-muse worthy.
Post by: Remuthra on January 23, 2015, 06:03:02 pm
Nope, overruled.I am.Nobody else got Urania?Apparently not. Nobody else is space-muse worthy.
Post by: pisskop on January 23, 2015, 06:15:34 pm
I took that :/Completely unsurprising... and depressing. Goddamn sellouts.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm not precisely on anybodies side, because no one is precisely on my side.
https://uk.isidewith.com/results/754779901:423539451
Post by: Vector on February 25, 2015, 01:13:38 am
Post by: MaximumZero on February 25, 2015, 01:16:20 am
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on February 25, 2015, 02:49:15 am
Strength of individual traits: Introverted: 86%, Sensing: 23%, Thinking: 8%, Judging: 12%.
Post by: Orange Wizard on February 25, 2015, 04:15:10 am
Post by: Naryar on February 25, 2015, 05:23:04 am
“Companions the creator seeks, not corpses, not herds and believers. Fellow creators the creator seeks -- those who write new values on new tablets. Companions the creator seeks, and fellow harvesters; for everything about him is ripe for the harvest.”
Post by: Sebastian2203 on February 25, 2015, 11:52:34 am
Took another 2 tests they say the same....
Post by: Darvi on February 25, 2015, 12:01:04 pm
INTJ. I have no idea what that means or the relevance thereof.It means that you're smarter and better than everybody else and get to act like a dick for it #iamverysmart
Post by: Dutchling on February 25, 2015, 12:04:29 pm
Post by: Sebastian2203 on February 25, 2015, 12:16:38 pm
INTJ. I have no idea what that means or the relevance thereof.It means that you're smarter and better than everybody else and get to act like a dick for it #iamverysmart
I was often classified as egocentric person by doctors or normal people.... Hmmmm
Post by: Itnetlolor on February 25, 2015, 12:53:12 pm
Still getting this score since Highschool. Woo!
However, as for careers (post-scoring), screw all of those, I'm the definition of lazy. My sin is Sloth.
Post by: Orange Wizard on February 25, 2015, 03:32:35 pm
yaaayINTJ. I have no idea what that means or the relevance thereof.It means that you're smarter and better than everybody else and get to act like a dick for it #iamverysmart
wait that's not good at all
Post by: Solifuge on February 25, 2015, 04:05:51 pm
Spoiler: INFP (click to show/hide)
Seems I've gotten more introverted, and less extreme elsewhere over the last few years. Always been on the border of Thinking/Percieving. Might just be greater self-awareness talking, though.
The Self-Awareness and Personal Growth tab under your results is pretty cool. I like the quotations. The functional analysis too... I'd agree that absent-mindedness tempered by strong people sense, and losing context and sense of proportion (one bad detail seems huge, and hides the more prevalent trends or info) when dealing with external or non-me matters is pretty accurate! And fighting against human inhumanity toward other people or forms of life is a pretty big motivator, if not the biggest one I'm aware of.
Post by: hops on February 25, 2015, 05:11:59 pm
http://www.humanmetrics.com/hr/JTypesResult.aspx
Post by: Tiruin on February 26, 2015, 05:56:22 am
I'm really unsure on that.yaaayINTJ. I have no idea what that means or the relevance thereof.It means that you're smarter and better than everybody else and get to act like a dick for it #iamverysmart
wait that's not good at all
What I got defined as, given me being INTJ was that I'm akin to a prophet mindset--able to see many things in thought, as an analogy.
...Being a dick like that isn't really inclusive of being INTJ...Its more like being condescending and egocentric.
Though as a disclaimer--the test is merely a general guide to how you are likelier to be, rather than a full identifier.
Mine somewhat shifted to INFJ. x3
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Meaning (click to show/hide)
Post by: Lyeos on February 28, 2015, 11:13:48 am
That's a thing that happened.
Edit: Goodbye, broken link!
Post by: 4maskwolf on February 28, 2015, 12:37:23 pm
Edit: Although, amusingly, I'm on the border of INTP/INFP/ISFP/ISTP, with only slight to no leaning towards S and T. But I find ISTP described myself the best.
Post by: Spehss _ on March 05, 2015, 11:55:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nah, Tiruin, Darvi's totally right. Can confirm. #itooamverysmart #trustmeimadoctorpepperI'm really unsure on that.yaaayINTJ. I have no idea what that means or the relevance thereof.It means that you're smarter and better than everybody else and get to act like a dick for it #iamverysmart
wait that's not good at all
Pssst, I'm being sarcastic and facetious, guys.
Post by: Arx on March 06, 2015, 12:08:50 am
Also what it means is we are the one percent. Hopefully no-one starts an occupy INTJ movement.
Post by: Spehss _ on March 06, 2015, 12:21:57 am
I'm also still INTJ.
Also what it means is we are the one percent. Hopefully no-one starts an occupy INTJ movement.
99% of Bay12 is the 1% then. :P
Really, INTJ seems common here.
Post by: Elephant Parade on March 06, 2015, 01:15:26 am
Post by: Empiricist on March 06, 2015, 01:47:41 am
Post by: NAV on March 06, 2015, 03:30:18 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on March 06, 2015, 03:38:08 am
How many times has that personality test been posted, anyway?Five, six times? Dunno. We don't really have any new tests on this thread, though.
Post by: Cptn Kaladin Anrizlokum on March 06, 2015, 05:01:07 am
How many times has that personality test been posted, anyway?It is in the OP, so that makes it much more common for new posters to go to as well.
Post by: Graknorke on March 08, 2015, 05:39:48 pm
And it has never given me any insight into anything. So I suppose it's at least consistently useless?
Post by: Orange Wizard on March 08, 2015, 05:41:36 pm
So I suppose it's at least consistently useless?+1
Post by: Tiruin on March 09, 2015, 02:15:46 am
No. :v Judging it as that sides on the controversial aspect and denounces it entirely.So I suppose it's at least consistently useless?+1
Post by: Uristides on March 09, 2015, 04:19:20 am
Post by: Putnam on March 09, 2015, 04:49:33 am
Post by: Graknorke on March 09, 2015, 04:27:21 pm
Judging it as that sides on the controversial aspect and denounces it entirely....eeh?
I understand the individual words but I have no idea what you're saying overall.
Post by: hops on March 11, 2015, 03:45:12 am
Post by: TD1 on March 13, 2015, 11:14:44 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Solifuge on March 26, 2015, 03:13:18 pm
http://www.5lovelanguages.com/profile/ (http://www.5lovelanguages.com/profile/)
Spoiler: My Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on March 26, 2015, 04:41:56 pm
Though, hmm. Languages. :-\
Quote
The 5 Love Languages® profile will give you a thorough analysis of your emotional communication preference.Oh that makes sense now.
...It will single out your primary love language, what it means, and how you can use it to connect and deepen your relationships with others.
Spoiler: My Scores! (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: My Stuff Behind My Scores! (click to show/hide)
Thanks for the test, Soli!
Post by: Orange Wizard on March 26, 2015, 04:59:31 pm
8 Physical Touch
7 Quality Time
4 Words of Affirmation
1 Receiving Gifts
Sounds about right. I'm less touchy than the test would have you believe, though.
Post by: Lyeos on March 26, 2015, 05:15:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Darvi on March 26, 2015, 05:27:16 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on March 26, 2015, 06:22:00 pm
Spoiler: Scores (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Top Meanings (No surprise, since I was raised in a large family) (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheDarkStar on March 26, 2015, 08:36:45 pm
This test doesn't even have a "neither" option on the first question.
I quit answering because neither one was true for me for #1. I wonder what that says about me...
Post by: Cheeetar on March 26, 2015, 10:36:55 pm
Spoiler: Scores (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Top Meanings (click to show/hide)
Post by: Itnetlolor on March 27, 2015, 12:44:41 am
Post by: Tiruin on March 27, 2015, 03:34:23 am
Tests go one way or the other. I was :/ because of the lacking idea of both...because of the spectrum of choice being a tad bit limited.This test doesn't even have a "neither" option on the first question.
I quit answering because neither one was true for me for #1. I wonder what that says about me...
But its a nice general indicator.
Post by: Putnam on March 27, 2015, 03:45:52 am
Post by: Graknorke on March 29, 2015, 05:21:53 am
This test doesn't even have a "neither" option on the first question. What a load of bull.When tests have neutral options they end up being most of what people pick. That's why it's poor design to include any non-choices.
Post by: Wimopy on March 29, 2015, 10:01:29 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Helps that I hate hugs and back rubs and general physical contact.
Post by: SquatchHammer on March 29, 2015, 06:17:18 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not really surprised...
Post by: Culise on March 30, 2015, 10:01:19 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm slightly surprised by my results, though in retrospect, I probably shouldn't be.
And indeed, they did tend to repeat questions - since the sets are given in pairs, Itnetlolor has the right of it in suggesting that it's to permit calibration of the results, but it's also done as a data validation check to see how strongly you felt about a preference towards one category or the other. I ran through the PDF again to confirm it, and each answer pair is done three times (for instance, A/E is used for questions 1, 8, and 30). I would have done it either two or four times, myself, so that a perfectly ambiguous or non-preferential answer set wouldn't skew the results one way or the other, but I can see why three iterations was used for tie-breakers explicitly to avoid that circumstance.
Post by: Solifuge on April 09, 2015, 10:53:16 am
https://secure.isidewith.com/ (https://secure.isidewith.com/)
I especially liked the reference material each question included, the optional expanded detail for answers, and the Support Map. A well executed test like this could help people understand their own politics, help them self-educate about political issues being debated, and teach them where the parties they support stand on those issues.
Also, apparently I only share 38% of my political beliefs with my state. Time to move, I guess!
(http://i.imgur.com/3BgoRpf.jpg)
Spoiler: Graph (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Support Map (click to show/hide)
Post by: SirQuiamus on April 09, 2015, 02:38:13 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Graph (click to show/hide)
...although I'm not very surprised at the results. (I'm slightly greener and less authoritarian than I thought.)
EDIT: The last question was a tough call because all the candidates were so bloody... American.
Post by: i2amroy on April 09, 2015, 03:06:35 pm
Seems like this one was broad enough that their average put me almost dead center. :P
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: birdy51 on April 09, 2015, 03:34:08 pm
Spoiler: Politickins (click to show/hide)
But there we go.
Post by: Tack on April 09, 2015, 04:01:14 pm
Saw, did.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hah. And here I thought I was right wing.
Post by: Dutchling on April 09, 2015, 04:13:39 pm
Lots of questions I didn't care about obviously, with me not being an American and all that.
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 09, 2015, 04:15:35 pm
Also, someone needs to make one of these for NZ.
Post by: Putnam on April 10, 2015, 12:42:44 am
Quote
Green Party: Yes, and ban all genetically modified foods
how the fuck am i even remotely associated with that
Post by: Cheeetar on April 10, 2015, 01:06:37 am
Spoiler: I mostly side with the Green party (click to show/hide)
Post by: i2amroy on April 10, 2015, 01:08:50 am
(except birdy51 and his strange conservatism :P)
Post by: Solifuge on April 11, 2015, 02:04:13 pm
QuoteGreen Party: Yes, and ban all genetically modified foods
how the fuck am i even remotely associated with that
Maybe because you agree with them on other policies? I think every party in the US has unreasonable opinions, but as far as I'm concerned, banning GMOs isn't as bad as banning access to birth control, legalizing discrimination based on [criterion du juor], or further exacerbating the power/quality of life gulf between the wealthy and poor.
Post by: TheDarkStar on April 11, 2015, 10:37:53 pm
(https://secure.isidewith.com/results-image/823791366.png)
According the the US map that compared my results to other's results, I agreed strongly with people in coastal California and a few Midwestern cities along with the Salt Lake City area of Utah. I disagreed with people from many of the other western and southern states, although I did agree with people from Montana. I also disagreed a lot with most people from Nebraska. I sided with my current state on 32% of issues.
Post by: Wimopy on April 12, 2015, 05:29:13 am
Spoiler: Warning, large picture, dunno how to resize (click to show/hide)
Post by: penguinofhonor on April 12, 2015, 07:40:34 am
Post by: Arx on April 12, 2015, 07:55:30 am
The Greens seem like a very sane party.
Post by: Graknorke on April 12, 2015, 08:26:02 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SirQuiamus on April 12, 2015, 01:35:02 pm
Yeeessss... join the green horde...
...but seriously, why would anyone choose a party with all the chances of a snail on a highway? Even stupid Yurpeans know that there are only two valid options in the American poll booth. [/realpolitik] [/apathy]
EDIT: Fun fact from Wikipedia:
Quote
The Green Party in the United States has won elected office mostly at the local level [131 as of 2015]; most winners of public office in the United States who are considered Greens have won nonpartisan-ballot elections (that is, elections in which the candidates' party affiliations were not printed on the ballot).Argh.
Post by: Helgoland on April 12, 2015, 08:26:53 pm
Quote
Should the U.S. maintain a presence at the United Nations?What the fuck?
-Yes, and use the U.N. peacekeeping forces to protect U.S. interests
No surprises in the outcome though. 95% Greens, 92% Democrats, 13% Republicans.
Post by: Tawa on April 12, 2015, 08:56:48 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Putnam on April 12, 2015, 09:39:08 pm
QuoteGreen Party: Yes, and ban all genetically modified foods
how the fuck am i even remotely associated with that
Maybe because you agree with them on other policies? I think every party in the US has unreasonable opinions, but as far as I'm concerned, banning GMOs isn't as bad as banning access to birth control, legalizing discrimination based on [criterion du juor], or further exacerbating the power/quality of life gulf between the wealthy and poor.
Banning GMOs means the death of billions. Just by the numbers, banning GMOs is quite possibly the most evil thing you could possibly do.
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 13, 2015, 12:14:07 am
sometimes you have to compromise in order to get the desired outcomeTell that to King Edward.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 13, 2015, 12:18:02 am
Post by: Putnam on April 13, 2015, 12:34:35 am
The Green Party also advocates for alternative medicine.
...oh, okay, so they're the exact brand of frickin' liberals that I like to complain about among my politically-interested right-wing friends
(personally I'm a smug-ass mugwump)
Post by: Helgoland on April 13, 2015, 06:28:24 am
The Green Party also advocates for alternative medicine. They're a bunch of moderately wealthy hacks whom fill up their relative position entirely thanks to it not having high numbers of supporters.These issues mostly go away after a party has become successful. The German Greens used to be like that, but you wouldn't believe how quickly they transformed into a pile of suits after they got a shot at exercising real power :D
Post by: Wimopy on April 13, 2015, 09:53:10 am
Pretty sure if they'd change a few of their standpoints they'd become a viable political party.
So, we infiltrate them? They have a name and a president candidate, we have good ideas. Sounds like a good deal.
Post by: scrdest on April 13, 2015, 01:38:08 pm
As in it counting the answer as similar if, with the hypothetical question 'Should small cute puppies be stomped brutally?' my answer was 'No, what the hell is wrong with you?!' whereas Greens' was 'No, gas them instead.' - the only convergence was the 'No', the rest couldn't differ more.
Plus, not being a citizen or otherwise a dweller of 'MURRICA! a couple questions were 'eh, whatever' for me.
Post by: Powder Miner on April 13, 2015, 04:00:14 pm
82% Constitution (They're similar to the libertarians but define the nation on religious terms-- I do not.)
75% Green Party (except when you count the major issues of the green party :p)
70% Democrats (Not a fan, for mainly govt-power and economic reasons)
67% Republicans (Not a fan either, because of disagreeing with nearly every social policy they have. Support them economically, though.)
67% Conservative Party (There's not that big a difference between these and the Republicans)
37% Socialist Party (I am just... super not socialist.)
Post by: ECrownofFire on April 14, 2015, 02:40:34 am
Somewhere in the upper left in their chart thingy.
Post by: Ghills on April 15, 2015, 12:56:58 pm
The Green Party also advocates for alternative medicine. They're a bunch of moderately wealthy hacks whom fill up their relative position entirely thanks to it not having high numbers of supporters.
To be fair, a lot of alternative medicine is moderately helpful - think of all those medicines we have that came from examining traditional medicines and identifying the relevant chemical. Acupuncture is effective at treating some conditions, etc. Sorting out the decent ideas from the horrible ones takes work but can be worth it.
If you mean magnets, crystals, animal bones and horrifying herbal teas, then mock on.
Post by: Vector on April 15, 2015, 02:35:41 pm
Post by: Tiruin on April 15, 2015, 11:33:15 pm
/me cheers Ghills.To be fair, a lot of alternative medicine is moderately helpful - think of all those medicines we have that came from examining traditional medicines and identifying the relevant chemical. Acupuncture is effective at treating some conditions, etc. Sorting out the decent ideas from the horrible ones takes work but can be worth it.
If you mean magnets, crystals, animal bones and horrifying herbal teas, then mock on.
I like you.
Just like my medicine professor related stories about alternative medicine.
...Then punched the whole 'ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE EES BAAHD' stereotype, by giving the contexts to...literally all {as far as my memory goes -.-} discussed alternative medicine practices, and then noting the idea and mechanism behind the work.
Then related that last sentence in your quote and then recategorized the general label of alternative medicine. :P
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 15, 2015, 11:49:00 pm
Post by: Putnam on April 16, 2015, 12:04:03 am
Obviously you can look at alternative medicine for new efficient treatments, but at that point they patent it, give it a new name and call it medicine.
Post by: redwallzyl on April 16, 2015, 12:25:43 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on April 16, 2015, 01:21:59 am
If it can be quantified and studied, it hardly continues to be "alternative" medicine. Traditional medicines can be filtered through to see if anything was actually discovered (the recent revelation that an old Anglo-Saxon poultice for ingrown hair infections just so happens to kill the fuck out of MRSA comes to mind), but the support of alternative medicine isn't a good thing. It kills.Now I remember the first part of what my professor mentioned. I wondered why there was something nudging me that 'edit yer post in that thread :I '.
...Anyone got a test for memory? >.>
Post by: Wimopy on April 16, 2015, 02:26:26 pm
Jokes aside, I'm not totally against 'alternative medicine' either, just like I'm not totally against regulating GMOs either.
I guess the medicine one depends on what you view as alternative and what not. I'm generally against modern homeotherapy (sugar-tablet with traces of a plant in it which sound good when written in Latin, but has no real medical value), but if a traditional method has worked for centuries, then I'm okay with it. Also, if a placebo can help someone, it's also worth a shot, just not as a first choice. Or maybe it IS a good first choice, but it shouldn't be the only choice? Not sure.
As for GMOs, it's enough to have some strict testing procedures, just in case that gene was misunderstood and causes the plant to contain trace amounts of poison that could build up or something. But enforced labeling of food as "Genetically Modified" would probably ruin their sales. That's definitely not acceptable in a capitalist state.
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 16, 2015, 04:52:03 pm
But enforced labeling of food as "Genetically Modified" would probably ruin their sales. That's definitely not acceptable in a capitalist state.Bloody commies and their consumer protection acts.
Post by: birdy51 on April 16, 2015, 05:52:21 pm
THE GREEN PARTY IS ONE... ALL ARE THE GREEN PARTY...
(except birdy51 and his strange conservatism :P)
I shall hold my ground against the tides of green!
Post by: Tiruin on April 20, 2015, 11:13:30 pm
Must drop this link (http://www.ted.com/talks/ben_ambridge_10_myths_about_psychology_debunked?language=en#).
Also another one (http://www.webpages.uidaho.edu/psyc390/pdf/5-3-Factors-that-Influence-Memory.pdf).
Both purely for educational purposes ._.
Post by: redwallzyl on April 21, 2015, 01:00:48 am
are you thinking of copper salts?If it can be quantified and studied, it hardly continues to be "alternative" medicine. Traditional medicines can be filtered through to see if anything was actually discovered (the recent revelation that an old Anglo-Saxon poultice for ingrown hair infections just so happens to kill the fuck out of MRSA comes to mind), but the support of alternative medicine isn't a good thing. It kills.Now I remember the first part of what my professor mentioned. I wondered why there was something nudging me that 'edit yer post in that thread :I '.
...Anyone got a test for memory? >.>
Post by: Tiruin on April 21, 2015, 01:14:10 am
I wish I were still in the class that tried to push that auditory/visual/tactile learner crap. I was calling them out the moment they brought it up.Maybe contact the teacher or instructor? :) I'm certain that they'd be open to new information.
Post by: Vector on April 21, 2015, 01:42:48 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 28, 2015, 09:53:39 pm
Post by: stabbymcstabstab on April 28, 2015, 10:02:44 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm slighlty scared to say this fights me very, very well.
Post by: Arcvasti on April 28, 2015, 10:08:24 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 28, 2015, 10:15:23 pm
Post by: FearfulJesuit on April 28, 2015, 10:18:11 pm
(Edit: It appears there were only 20 villains in the database, and none of them were him. Also, a good third of them are from Hitler's inner circle...no love for Pol Pot or Turkmenbashy?)
Post by: Cheeetar on April 28, 2015, 10:21:36 pm
Spoiler: Osama Bin Laden (click to show/hide)
Huh. Interesting.
Post by: Putnam on April 28, 2015, 10:25:39 pm
Quote
Like Che Guevara, you are spontaneous, passionate, and communicative. It is important to you to be true to yourself and to stand up for what you believe in, provoking others out of their bourgeois complacency by tenderly calling out the world's injustices. You are passionate about your cause and can even wax somewhat poetic when speaking of the social change that you long for. However, remember that calling for change is not enough; the mature firebrand also points to practicable ways of implementing it.
oh boy
Post by: NullForceOmega on April 28, 2015, 10:31:24 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 28, 2015, 10:35:12 pm
Turkmenbashy?Do you want to be the person who tries to quantify the personality of Turkmenbashy?
Post by: mainiac on April 28, 2015, 10:36:21 pm
Oh god, I'm Hitler. (http://www.celebritytypes.com/villain/test.php)
Me too! Let's be masterbuds!
Post by: Xantalos on April 28, 2015, 10:37:38 pm
Post by: SealyStar on April 28, 2015, 10:40:07 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 28, 2015, 10:41:13 pm
...
And it decided that I'm Vladimir Putin, does he really qualify as a murderous villain at this point?He does if you live in Ukraine.
Post by: NullForceOmega on April 28, 2015, 10:44:05 pm
Post by: penguinofhonor on April 28, 2015, 10:45:44 pm
Post by: notquitethere on April 28, 2015, 10:46:07 pm
Post by: Baffler on April 28, 2015, 10:51:53 pm
I wish it was possible to look at all the other ones without clicking through them all again, and trying to guess how it categorized people. The one for Doenitz was kind of interesting.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 28, 2015, 11:19:59 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: mainiac on April 28, 2015, 11:23:38 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on April 28, 2015, 11:36:59 pm
Spoiler: Welp (click to show/hide)
I don't know what to say. Is it weird that I find this slightly disappointing?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 28, 2015, 11:39:21 pm
Post by: Xanmyral on April 28, 2015, 11:39:40 pm
That's a sentence I never thought I'd type.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 28, 2015, 11:40:40 pm
Post by: NAV on April 28, 2015, 11:46:55 pm
Post by: mainiac on April 29, 2015, 12:09:14 am
I don't know what to say.
I know what to say.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 29, 2015, 12:11:53 am
Albert Speer, same as MZ.
Same here. Near matching on the given graph, until it reaches the last category, where I am the opposite.
Post by: WillowLuman on April 29, 2015, 12:14:04 am
You just made my day.I don't know what to say.
I know what to say.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flying Dice on April 29, 2015, 12:29:34 am
Spoiler: Ulrike Meinhof for me (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on April 29, 2015, 01:17:22 am
High fives, y'all! We're monsters, but not as bad as the rest, for the most part. (Although some parts are horrifically bad.)Albert Speer, same as MZ.
Same here. Near matching on the given graph, until it reaches the last category, where I am the opposite.
Post by: Sirus on April 29, 2015, 01:41:33 am
Post by: Reudh on April 29, 2015, 02:08:53 am
Quote
Like Benito Mussolini, you are high in energy, sociable and spontaneous. When you are inspired to throw yourself into something, your enthusiasm is contagious, and others enjoy coming along with you for the ride. However, if you do not take care to think things through, you may find yourself trapped by consequences that could easily have been foreseen and avoided by more cautious people.
I'm okay with this.
Post by: Helgoland on April 29, 2015, 04:38:46 am
Damn, I would've liked to be someone more successful...
Post by: scrdest on April 29, 2015, 04:45:25 am
Post by: Caz on April 29, 2015, 05:03:52 am
???
Post by: Teneb on April 29, 2015, 06:10:21 am
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on April 29, 2015, 06:22:12 am
Well...
This is so far off it's not even funny, to be honest.
Post by: Uristides on April 29, 2015, 07:01:01 am
Quote
Like Che Guevara, you are spontaneous, passionate, and communicative. It is important to you to be true to yourself and to stand up for what you believe in, provoking others out of their bourgeois complacency by tenderly calling out the world's injustices. You are passionate about your cause and can even wax somewhat poetic when speaking of the social change that you long for. However, remember that calling for change is not enough; the mature firebrand also points to practicable ways of implementing it.
Post by: Haspen on April 29, 2015, 07:25:10 am
"Like Adolf Hitler, you are introverted but nevertheless possess a charisma that is second to none because you are strongly attuned to people. When you put your mind to it, you can charm anyone. You have a dramatic flair and you like testing other people's boundaries to see what will happen. Be careful that you do not end up playing with fire and getting yourself into a dangerous situation which you cannot charm your way out of."
Oh god, I'm Hitler. (http://www.celebritytypes.com/villain/test.php)
/me hi-fives fellow Hitler.
Post by: sjm9876 on April 29, 2015, 08:12:22 am
Minister of Armaments in Nazi Germany
"One seldom recognizes the devil when he is putting his hand on your shoulder."
Followed by an accurate summary of most of my flaws. Welp.
Post by: Wimopy on April 29, 2015, 08:30:28 am
I didn't like the options, so I chose on a whim a lot. No idea how I got "extroverted" preference on a personality test though. Always was 100% introverted before. (Not that that was in any way true, I just see myself like that)
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on April 29, 2015, 09:16:15 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: anailater on April 29, 2015, 09:28:09 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on April 29, 2015, 10:02:58 am
Spoiler: Osama bin Laden (click to show/hide)
Post by: scrdest on April 29, 2015, 10:54:43 am
Great High-five Forward!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Helgoland on April 29, 2015, 11:29:46 am
Post by: miauw62 on April 29, 2015, 11:38:10 am
Post by: Teneb on April 29, 2015, 11:45:28 am
i'm literally hitler, apparently.Shall we invade Poland?
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on April 29, 2015, 11:53:09 am
Post by: Haspen on April 29, 2015, 12:30:26 pm
i'm literally hitler, apparently.Shall we invade Poland?
Apparently it means I should invade... myself?
/me goes philosophical on dis.
Post by: darkpaladin109 on April 29, 2015, 12:46:03 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dutrius on April 29, 2015, 01:36:40 pm
Sensing: 1%
Thinking: 38%
Judging: 1%
Post by: Graknorke on April 29, 2015, 07:21:43 pm
Spoiler: Ulrike Meinhof (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tawa on April 29, 2015, 07:34:03 pm
Dictator triplets!Muammar Gaddafi?
Dictator twinsies!QuoteLike Muammar Gaddafi, you are extravagantly and unashamedly quirky, prizing experiences and conversations that are out of the ordinary. You are lively and free-spirited - maybe a little too free-spirited - and won't be trapped and suffocated by anything. You find conformity stifling in every sense, whether it be regular everyday 9-5 routines, mainstream fashion, or rigorous academic requirements of intellectual consistency. By all means keep doing your own thing, but realize that a greater awareness of practical concerns may benefit both yourself and those around you.
How am I supposed to feel about this
Post by: Bohandas on April 29, 2015, 10:53:05 pm
Albert Speer - Minister of Armaments in Nazi GermanySpoiler (click to show/hide)
I got Speer too.
Post by: SirQuiamus on April 30, 2015, 01:33:25 pm
...how the fuck did they figure it out?
Post by: Bauglir on April 30, 2015, 01:44:03 pm
Post by: SirQuiamus on April 30, 2015, 02:05:12 pm
More importantly, how are you posting from the bottom of the ocean? Did... did you find some sort of improbably good WiFi signal or something?
̀̒S̐̈͒̈̓͊o̍̀ͪ͌̐ͬrͥ̈́ͦ̈̃ͤrͥ̈́̽̐ỷ̾ͨͩ̚,͗̓̂̅c̅ͧ̏̉ͤa̿n̥̹̺͖͕ͧ̌̉̐̀ͬͪ'̝̲ͧ̓̒͋͆ͭ͑t̟͓͕̖͌.̓ ͎̙̫̆̓̽̌͌t̲͝ ̲̋ͩ̿̿͑́̚a̴͈̖͒ͣl̛͋ḳ̪̣̻͗ ̲̩̳̃r̗̘͇ͮi̷̯̱͎͍̿g͙͈ͧ͑ͤ̑̎h̨̳̟͇͍̠̞̑͆̃t̸͛̂̂ͥͪ ͙̰̗͕͎̹ͅn̟͆̾͋ͬ͒ ̢̦̠̜o͔̪͙̬̣͂̐͒͡ͅw.̏̈́̃͊͆͂ l̻͕̩͓̤̩͍ͦ̄ȏ͓͗ͯ͂͒͆s̻̰̙̲͙ͨͩ̾͢i̗͉͙̎͛͞ ň͏̸͖̭̜g̛̤̣̪͈̾ͯ̉̄͆ͩ͜ ̎̊ ̡͚̯͉ͦ͜͠c̟̜̮̏̅̿̏̈̄͗͆̎͞ơ̧̲̘͕̲͍̩̘ͭ̌̓͗͛n͛̅̓ͫ͋́̎̔͏͉̝͘͘n̪̟̟̼̲̜͂̈́̎̐ͫe͈̝͊̄͊̿̾̊̚c̟̲̼̥̯ͪ̅̉͒t̤͚́̈́i̐ͦ̃oͭ͊̽̌ͨ̓͛n̈́.ͦ.͠.̨̢̘͚̤̟̞͕͍̒̃ͤ̊̋̑̃̎ͧ
Post by: wierd on May 01, 2015, 01:30:31 am
I wouldn't consider using suicide bombers though. Much more likely to use kamikaze robots.
.. You know, reading my own spoiler text above, I would probably make a pretty good villian if I really wanted to... That's kinda scary.
Post by: WillowLuman on May 01, 2015, 01:41:22 am
Post by: Grim Portent on May 01, 2015, 02:02:26 am
I feel like my villainous tendencies are being undersold. >:(
@wierd
That's delightfully devious.
Wouldn't it be possible to convert a cheap robot vacuum cleaner into a bomb? They're a bit large for sneaking about in tunnels and ducts and the battery life is rather short, but replacing the internals that aren't power or motor functions could allow a nice bit of room for an improvised shrapnel bomb.
Then again it's entirely feasible to just chuck a bomb out of a window into a crowded street and nip out the back door, so automated anti-personnel bombs are pretty pointless against civilians anyway.
Really the most frightening thing about most terrorists is how bad they are at it, I dread to imagine what a talented group of infiltrating saboteurs could pull off.
Post by: Helgoland on May 01, 2015, 04:08:10 am
Post by: Guardian G.I. on May 01, 2015, 04:19:07 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Grim Portent on May 01, 2015, 04:54:59 am
An RC car is better suited for that - a Roomba is not exactly an all-terrain vehicle.
But the phrase 'Roomba Revolution' has quite a ring to it. :P
Post by: WillowLuman on May 01, 2015, 11:42:07 am
I broke the villain test, yay! :PHigh five!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zangi on May 01, 2015, 12:18:34 pm
Maybe in a city with decent road maintenance. Are there even any?An RC car is better suited for that - a Roomba is not exactly an all-terrain vehicle.
But the phrase 'Roomba Revolution' has quite a ring to it. :P
I'm Mao Zedong
Post by: wierd on May 01, 2015, 12:24:04 pm
m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmDhx5ZEUzY
(well, they flip over, but keep driving)
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on May 01, 2015, 12:32:55 pm
Spoiler: Ulrike Meinhof for me (click to show/hide)
same here.
Post by: Naryar on May 01, 2015, 03:46:44 pm
Funnily enough, I don't, and can't, actually hate Mao.
Stalin is just cold and inhuman, Hitler is a good example of what happens when you let hatred control you, but Mao...
Post by: scrdest on May 01, 2015, 05:11:52 pm
Post by: Elephant Parade on May 02, 2015, 01:39:05 am
Post by: Zrk2 on May 02, 2015, 02:41:59 am
Also, link (http://www.celebritytypes.com/villain/test.php), because it's buried way the hell back there.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I know it's easy to write prose people self-identify into, but some of that is frighteningly accurate.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I do all of this. I know a lot of it isn't healthy or beneficial, but my self-control is lacking, and I end up bullying those I can into submission just to make my life (and theirs, of course!) easier.
Post by: Glloyd on May 02, 2015, 11:23:21 am
Kay.
Post by: Flying Dice on May 02, 2015, 12:51:19 pm
Le gasp, a personality test that isn't using the same four-scale metric as everything else. (http://www.youjustgetme.com/)
Spoiler: Fairly accurate, too. (click to show/hide)
Of course it's also pretty short, so it's not difficult to guess.
Post by: Helgoland on May 02, 2015, 12:57:07 pm
Spoiler: Dislike confrontation? Pah! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Glloyd on May 02, 2015, 01:26:01 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
That's scarily accurate.
Post by: MaximumZero on May 02, 2015, 02:07:30 pm
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 02, 2015, 03:49:11 pm
[My comments are within square brackets.]
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Putnam on May 02, 2015, 04:28:36 pm
Here's one which I think is new for us.
Le gasp, a personality test that isn't using the same four-scale metric as everything else. (http://www.youjustgetme.com/)Spoiler: Fairly accurate, too. (click to show/hide)
Of course it's also pretty short, so it's not difficult to guess.
that description is
uh
You have a need for other people to like and admire you, and yet you tend to be critical of yourself. While you have some personality weaknesses, you are generally able to compensate for them. You have considerable unused capacity that you have not turned to your advantage. Disciplined and self-controlled on the outside, you tend to be worrisome and insecure on the inside. At times you have serious doubts as to whether you have made the right decision or done the right thing. You prefer a certain amount of change and variety and become dissatisfied when hemmed in by restrictions and limitations. You also pride yourself as an independent thinker and do not accept others' statements without satisfactory proof. But you have found it unwise to be too frank in revealing yourself to others. At times you are extroverted, affable, and sociable, while at other times you are introverted, wary, and reserved. Some of your aspirations tend to be rather unrealistic.
Post by: Zrk2 on May 02, 2015, 05:09:36 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
This is pretty accurate, although a lot of it is fence-sitting.
Post by: Flying Dice on May 02, 2015, 10:38:04 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 02, 2015, 10:44:47 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 02, 2015, 10:47:45 pm
Quote
Your personality tendencies in a nutshell...No shit, I just spent five minutes telling you that. And somehow you made it even vaguer.
You are very dependable and almost always follow through with your commitments. You are curious about many different things and highly value artistic expressions and ingenious thoughts. You are calm and logical for the most part, but some things worry you more than others. You show some tendency toward competitiveness and are comfortable expressing your opinions. You show some tendency towards being reserved in most social situations.
Post by: Zrk2 on May 03, 2015, 12:02:02 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 03, 2015, 12:13:52 am
Post by: Zrk2 on May 03, 2015, 01:27:44 am
Post by: wierd on May 03, 2015, 02:54:25 am
...
Sorry, thats what came to mind reading that.
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 03, 2015, 04:14:57 am
Useful test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you have a lower-than-average inclination towards honesty."
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 03, 2015, 07:28:59 am
Post by: MaximumZero on May 03, 2015, 08:27:49 am
Dos Equis.That is horrible stuff, by the way. Pretty sure they named it Dos Equis because it tastes like licking two horse asses.
Post by: Graknorke on May 03, 2015, 09:37:48 am
Probably because it isn't a real test and is just giving you all statements that any person would agree with.It's alright if you happen to give it statements that go all of one way. Otherwise it does give the "You are X but sometimes not(X)"
Post by: Tawa on May 03, 2015, 09:46:56 am
Here's one which I think is new for us.Dude this thing just throws Barnum Statements and Rainbow Ruses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading) at you.
Le gasp, a personality test that isn't using the same four-scale metric as everything else. (http://www.youjustgetme.com/)Spoiler: Fairly accurate, too. (click to show/hide)
Of course it's also pretty short, so it's not difficult to guess.
Post by: scrdest on May 03, 2015, 11:03:26 am
Well, mixed bag. 1 is rainbowish, 2 isn't, 3 is rainbowish, 4 seems rainbow but on re-reading it's just a 'supportive with a caveat', and 5 is fine. Mostly seems like the test didn't get strong enough YES/NOs on answers to make a concrete statement.Here's one which I think is new for us.Dude this thing just throws Barnum Statements and Rainbow Ruses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading) at you.
Le gasp, a personality test that isn't using the same four-scale metric as everything else. (http://www.youjustgetme.com/)Spoiler: Fairly accurate, too. (click to show/hide)
Of course it's also pretty short, so it's not difficult to guess.
Post by: Knit tie on May 03, 2015, 01:13:15 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on May 03, 2015, 01:14:59 pm
Post by: wierd on May 03, 2015, 02:05:32 pm
Useless test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you are a genius."
Useful test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you have a lower-than-average inclination towards honesty."
What if you have a state issued IQ score to back it up? (Granted, IQ is only one kind of intelligence, it is a kind of intelligence, and not everyone has an absurdly high score.)
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 03, 2015, 03:32:56 pm
Useless test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you are a genius."
Useful test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you have a lower-than-average inclination towards honesty."
What if you have a state issued IQ score to back it up? (Granted, IQ is only one kind of intelligence, it is a kind of intelligence, and not everyone has an absurdly high score.)
The catch is that taking an online personality test automatically invalidates high IQ scores :P
...but no, what I meant was that in purely statistical terms, self-reported intelligence does not really correlate with actual intelligence. If it did, we wouldn't even need such things as IQ-tests.
Post by: Cthulhu on May 03, 2015, 03:34:39 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 03, 2015, 03:55:31 pm
You need to keep the OP updated, ain't nobody got time to sift through six billion pages to find the current quiz.Mmm...no.
Post by: wierd on May 03, 2015, 05:51:38 pm
Useless test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you are a genius."
Useful test: "Are you a genius, yes/no? If you answered yes, you have a lower-than-average inclination towards honesty."
What if you have a state issued IQ score to back it up? (Granted, IQ is only one kind of intelligence, it is a kind of intelligence, and not everyone has an absurdly high score.)
The catch is that taking an online personality test automatically invalidates high IQ scores :P
...but no, what I meant was that in purely statistical terms, self-reported intelligence does not really correlate with actual intelligence. If it did, we wouldn't even need such things as IQ-tests.
That's still worded wrong.
You wrote " you have a lower-than-average inclination towards honesty.", meaning that you are more likely to lie. that is not the same as saying " you have a lower-than-average probability of answering this question honestly." meaning "Your chances of answering this honestly are low."
;)
The former implies that you are likely to like about other things as a consequence of your increased chances of making a false statement by answering the way you did-- the latter makes not such conclusion, and just asserts that you are likely to have lied. The former requires you to provide additional data that indicates such a trend is statistically significant to warrant such an assumption, the latter does not.
Post by: Knit tie on May 03, 2015, 09:23:30 pm
So you won't point me to the current quiz?You need to keep the OP updated, ain't nobody got time to sift through six billion pages to find the current quiz.Mmm...no.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 03, 2015, 09:30:19 pm
Come back when you're a little...mmm....richer.So you won't point me to the current quiz?You need to keep the OP updated, ain't nobody got time to sift through six billion pages to find the current quiz.Mmm...no.
Or jump back and forth pages to isolate the most recent thread title.
Post by: 4maskwolf on May 03, 2015, 09:45:26 pm
...
...
...
4mask confirmed for Nazi.
Post by: GentlemanRaptor on May 04, 2015, 07:08:56 am
Post by: Zrk2 on May 04, 2015, 08:00:06 am
I am apparently good ole' Joe Stalin. That description hit scarily close to home.
Welcome aboard. It's time to bully others into submission.
Post by: misko27 on May 04, 2015, 11:22:22 am
Also, all of my scores were a little under Lenin's, so overall I am a little less Lenin than Lenin.
"Trust is good. Control is better."
Post by: Zrk2 on May 04, 2015, 11:54:29 am
I am Lenin, so I have full trust in the many Stalins to advance the Soviet Agenda.
Also, all of my scores were a little under Lenin's, so overall I am a little less Lenin than Lenin.
"Trust is good. Control is better."
IIRC that makes you a... Menshevik?
Post by: Leatra on May 04, 2015, 02:46:05 pm
My conclusion: I'm a commie.
Post by: Itnetlolor on May 16, 2015, 11:31:02 pm
/me pile of brains collapses in a gooey mess of grey matter.
Okay. That doesn't work. Let's try this instead: http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf (http://www.iqtest.dk/main.swf)
I got a score of 130 on this. I don't know how well it measures though, though it calculates at a Deviation 15 (International sounds more brutal at Dev-24).
Had to take the test on one of my jobs I came across as a pre- and post- test. Pre-test, done a month ago, scored 124, same deviation.
So how does everyone else stack up? In the meantime, I'm gonna clean up all these brains.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 17, 2015, 12:57:00 am
Post by: Cheeetar on May 17, 2015, 02:12:18 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 17, 2015, 03:00:32 am
Post by: wierd on May 17, 2015, 11:02:28 am
This is a terrible IQ test.
Post by: Wimopy on May 17, 2015, 12:59:32 pm
By the way, I'm not really sure why people are so obsessed with gradually increasing difficulty in tests. Won't the subject be mentally fatigued by the end? I know I had enough of patterns after the first few questions... Or is mental stamina/endurance also a vital part of intelligence?
Post by: wierd on May 17, 2015, 01:08:03 pm
It's just a bullshit thing that test makers do out of habit.
Again, visual pattern recognition is only one aspect of human intelligence, and this test is bullshit for focusing on it 100%.
Intelligence is how well you can find patters, yes-- it is also how well you can assimilate and use information. It is also how well you can apply past knowledge in new, unexpected ways. It is also how well you can derive relationships between abstractions to come to useful conclusions.
This test NEEDS logic questions. it NEEDS story questions. It NEEDS to test working memory depth by forbidding the "Go back" button, and then asking questions about prior questions.
Post by: Itnetlolor on May 17, 2015, 03:00:19 pm
Basically, like everyone else, it felt more like a flash game, and less like a test.
Post by: Solifuge on May 18, 2015, 02:04:49 am
pattern recognition testing is only part of IQ testing. This one focuses EXCLUSIVELY on visual pattern recognition. Where are the logic questions? Where are the math questions? Where are the reading comprehension questions? Where are the memory questions?
This is a terrible IQ test.
Huh? This was a language independent test that plays on logic without preexisting knowledge. "Reading" and "Math" were being performed at a basal level here, in that you were learning symbols, discerning meanings, and performing logical operations. And no, there were totes logic questions! All kinds of logic happening!
Spoiler: Don't read if you haven't taken it yet, and want an accurate test (click to show/hide)
I agree that "Intelligence" is a pretty abstract concept, and tends to get conflated with ideas about learning, competence, or capability, especially when we put a Score with it. Questions like these don't test whether people are knowledgeable, skilled, are able to be generally effective in communication or society-at-large, or all the other ways people are effective and great. It's specifically a test of your brain's ability to bootstrap new knowledge/logic by understanding and integrating a system of symbols or logical units, without relying on any prior knowledge. It's base-brain level reasoning, or critical thinking and info-synthesizing. I don't think language, algebra, etc. really apply to that, since those are behaviors based on learning, memory, and experience... like riding bikes or memorizing state names or making pancakes from scratch, or whatever other highly useful and valuabe skills you learn and become knowledgeable about by rote.
EDIT: Wanted to take a crack at the last few I missed. Got 138 on my second pass. I don't think I'd have been able to get that in the time limit, even if I had been going quickly, but I almost always run out of time on tests. Kinda hate timed tests, because I tend to think slowly.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 18, 2015, 03:51:09 am
Post by: Dutrius on May 18, 2015, 06:27:14 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 12, 2015, 05:36:56 pm
Got Albert Speer, Nazi architect of buildings and minister of armaments
Suddenly I feel the urge to build ROMAN PILLARS EVERYWHERE
Post by: Calidovi on June 12, 2015, 07:07:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Itnetlolor on June 12, 2015, 08:54:09 pm
http://colorquiz.com/
Seems to act like a mood ring, if anything. And it sorta called my mood accurately. Maybe not a personality test, exactly, but still neat.
Post by: SealyStar on June 12, 2015, 08:58:29 pm
I'm uncertain how accurate this is, but it's pretty interesting.ScientificTM
http://colorquiz.com/
Seems to act like a mood ring, if anything. And it sorta called my mood accurately. Maybe not a personality test, exactly, but still neat.
Post by: notquitethere on June 13, 2015, 12:20:44 am
This is a quiz I made about six years ago and have only just rediscovered. Unique among internet quizs, this has 151 unique results GUARANTEED to be 100% accurate of your inner Pokétype.
I usually come out as a Dragonair, how about you?
Post by: Tiruin on June 13, 2015, 12:28:20 am
What Pokémon Are You? (http://www.bubbleof.me/pokemon/pokemon.html)At the end, it lists a list of pokemon--I suppose the topmost in the list, where it navigates to is the answer? :P
This is a quiz I made about six years ago and have only just rediscovered. Unique among internet quizs, this has 151 unique results GUARANTEED to be 100% accurate of your inner Pokétype.
I usually come out as a Dragonair, how about you?
It's nice to rediscover things you made yourself. :)
Quote from: WHAT POKEMON ARE YOU???
/me is an Eevee!
133 Eevee
Eevee have little in the way of characteristic quirks, but are usually loyal and affectionate and are able to adapt to whatever situation they find themselves in.
Post by: notquitethere on June 13, 2015, 12:36:31 am
Spoiler: Regarding the Color Quiz (click to show/hide)
Post by: Graknorke on June 13, 2015, 01:47:19 am
Quote
095 Onixnooo, I got the dick answer. For the test you linked anyway.
Onix are very hot-headed, and even when they try to do the right thing they often end up misunderstood.
For the other test on your site I got
Quote
133 Eevee
Eevee have little in the way of characteristic quirks, but are usually loyal and affectionate and are able to adapt to whatever situation they find themselves in.
So there's some conflict of answers there.
Post by: notquitethere on June 13, 2015, 02:02:51 am
Post by: Graknorke on June 13, 2015, 02:04:57 am
Uh, there's only one test. To be fair, you're coming across a bit Onix right now.http://www.bubbleof.me/pokemon/pokemon.html
http://www.bubbleof.me/pokemon/
Both are there, and both are different. Same answer sheet, though.
Post by: notquitethere on June 13, 2015, 02:09:54 am
Edit: I've fixed it now. http://www.bubbleof.me/pokemon/ (http://www.bubbleof.me/pokemon/) now leads to the correct page. Thanks for spotting that. Sorry I misunderstood you when you were trying to do the right thing.
You might have thought it was a different quiz because each set of questions you're given depend on your previous answers. As such, although there are 67 sets of questions in the quiz, most routes through you'll usually be given about four to six question.
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 13, 2015, 10:09:09 am
Nidoking are angered easily and can be very violent when provoked. Nidoking will often go on rampages for little or no apparent reason.
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD
Spoiler: colours (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on June 13, 2015, 11:44:41 am
Quote
085 Dodrio
Dodrio are early risers and fine singers, but they are prone to self doubt and internal bickering.
Be strong, Clarence. Be strong for mother.
Post by: Wimopy on June 13, 2015, 12:19:23 pm
Quote
133 Eevee
Eevee have little in the way of characteristic quirks, but are usually loyal and affectionate and are able to adapt to whatever situation they find themselves in.
My potential for evolution is simply limitless, yet I still got stuck as an Eevee... or am I looking too much into it?
Anyway, good enough.
Post by: Zrk2 on June 13, 2015, 01:43:26 pm
Post by: Graknorke on June 13, 2015, 05:11:01 pm
Thanks for spotting that. Sorry I misunderstood you when you were trying to do the right thing.ill batter ur ed in, i sware on me mum
Spoiler: COLOURS (click to show/hide)
EDIT: Just noticed "flexible and stubborn". Kek.
Post by: Tawa on June 13, 2015, 05:16:56 pm
Spoiler: Pokémon Quiz (click to show/hide)
Post by: Helgoland on June 13, 2015, 05:36:30 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on June 13, 2015, 07:00:08 pm
Quote
133 EeveeDon't know crap about Pokemon (Besides my limited play of SSB, and TPP), but I'll take it.
Eevee have little in the way of characteristic quirks, but are usually loyal and affectionate and are able to adapt to whatever situation they find themselves in.
Post by: Tawa on June 13, 2015, 07:01:06 pm
Post by: Reudh on June 13, 2015, 08:16:17 pm
Quote133 EeveeDon't know crap about Pokemon (Besides my limited play of SSB, and TPP), but I'll take it.
Eevee have little in the way of characteristic quirks, but are usually loyal and affectionate and are able to adapt to whatever situation they find themselves in.
Also their genome is ridiculously unstable, which is why they can "adapt to whatever situation". Hence the high number of eeveelutions - water dwelling, fire using, electricity using, nocturnal dark thing, dawn/crepuscular psychic thing, foresty sorta thing, icy sorta thing, and annoying cutesy French fairy thing.
Post by: Sirus on June 30, 2015, 02:44:08 am
Quote
016 Pidgey
Pidgey are very docile and nondescript. They are usually easy to be around, but if panicked can lash out at those close to them.
...yep
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on July 22, 2015, 01:00:16 am
Quote
019 Rattata
Rattata live a fast paced life-
Nope.
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 22, 2015, 01:27:42 am
Spoiler: Colour Test Results (click to show/hide)
Fairly accurate, too. Huh.
Post by: Baffler on July 22, 2015, 01:32:28 am
here it is for people in the future reading the thread and not wanting to search. (http://colorquiz.com/index.php)
Post by: Flying Dice on July 22, 2015, 01:57:29 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Meh. Sorta right, but a lot of the responses I've seen in other peoples' seem to confirm that a lot of it is intentionally vague and broad.
Post by: Wimopy on July 25, 2015, 03:04:48 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: SupremeSandwich on July 25, 2015, 02:57:31 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's actually scary how accurate that is
Post by: SirQuiamus on July 31, 2015, 02:37:06 pm
Your Desired Objective
Your Desired Objective
Your Desired Objective
Your Desired Objective
Now I understand why Cinder changed that username. :p
Post by: Calidovi on July 31, 2015, 05:13:52 pm
Your Desired ObjectiveYour Desired ObjectiveYour Desired ObjectiveYour Desired Objective
Now I understand why Cinder changed that username. :p
Maybe I should change my name to objective.
Post by: penguinofhonor on July 31, 2015, 08:31:01 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I am disappointed. Pretty much everything is either vague or wrong or both. A couple spot-on statements, but not any more than I'd expect if these were chosen completely randomly.
Post by: Grim Portent on September 12, 2015, 03:55:01 pm
Labour 94
Lib Dems 91
SNP 89
UKIP 36
Cons 30
Greens 90
Sinn Fein 91
Plaid Cymru 90
BNP 23
Democratic Unionist 9
Amusingly enough when I looked at the results in greater depth I found I agreed with the SNP on every issue, I just picked different answers with the same meaning, 'yes' compared to 'yes and x condition' where I felt the x condition was implicit type differences, which was enough to skew the results based on how they weight the answers, while I disagreed with Labour on several major issues, but they got weighted higher in the results anyway.
EDIT: Further examination has me siding with the Greens, Plaid Cymru and Sinn Fein basically as much as the SNP.
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 12, 2015, 04:09:38 pm
https://uk.isidewith.com/political-quizDone the test today:
67% Con, 62% LibDem, 60% Lab, 58% UKIP, 44% Plaid Cymru, 30% BNP, 27% SNP. Pretty even spread with a largely liberal education, healthcare, foreign policy, environmental stance and a largely conservative economic stance.
86% UKIP, 82% Con, 65% Libdem, 63% DemUnion, 60% Labour, 59% BNP, 53% SNP, 36% Green, 34% Plaid Cymru
Pretty much same as before, except now instead of a liberal foreign policy it's very Tory/Kipper
Apparently also very DemUnion, which before I did not agree on enough for it to matter posting. Definitely much more polarized results this time around than last year; where before I agreed with no party in particular now there's nearly a 20% gap between either of the top two right wing parties and libdems
Owlbread can probably be blamed for why I agree with the SNP on twice as many issues as before
Post by: TD1 on September 16, 2015, 08:16:36 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 16, 2015, 06:22:44 pm
UKIP is life, UKIP is love.remove immigrant REMOVE IMMIGRANT
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 16, 2015, 06:31:42 pm
we are rich and have no gold now hahahaha ha because of goronUKIP is life, UKIP is love.remove immigrant REMOVE IMMIGRANT
rip LSP, bantering in the Malvinas above
Post by: BFEL on September 17, 2015, 07:19:41 am
Also
Your Desired ObjectiveYour Desired ObjectiveYour Desired ObjectiveYour Desired Objective
Now I understand why Cinder changed that username. :p
I always assumed it was because of
Dammit/me is totally fine with getting their ass sore if you know what I meanIS THAT YOUR.....OBJECTIVE?!??!?!?! :P
Post by: Wimopy on September 17, 2015, 01:28:57 pm
I always assumed it was because ofDammit/me is totally fine with getting their ass sore if you know what I meanIS THAT YOUR.....OBJECTIVE?!??!?!?! :P
Either way it was a rather bad choice of a name in hindsight, huh?
Post by: notquitethere on September 17, 2015, 01:53:10 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 17, 2015, 05:10:00 pm
Post by: BFEL on September 17, 2015, 06:49:54 pm
Are you telling me Objective used to be Insanity Incarnate?
HOW MANY OF YOU PEOPLE DID I KNOW BEFORE I KNEW WHO YOU WERE?
I DON'T KNOW WHO ANYONE IS ANYMORE
Post by: Teneb on September 17, 2015, 06:59:08 pm
Are you telling me Objective used to be Insanity Incarnate?OW was II. It's a deathly joke, see. Here's a sword so you can perform sepukku.
Post by: Eric Blank on September 17, 2015, 07:13:18 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 17, 2015, 07:45:46 pm
I was following NQT's joke pattern. I didn't mean toAre you telling me Objective used to be Insanity Incarnate?OW was II. It's a deathly joke, see. Here's a sword so you can perform sepukku.
Post by: BFEL on September 17, 2015, 08:06:57 pm
HOLYSHITFUCK AGAIN!Are you telling me Objective used to be Insanity Incarnate?OW was II. It's a deathly joke, see. Here's a sword so you can perform sepukku.
ARGARGARGLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
*BFEL has gone stark raving mad!*
Post by: hops on September 17, 2015, 08:53:23 pm
Also, I was formerly known as Kurtulmak.
Post by: BFEL on September 17, 2015, 08:56:05 pm
STOP FUCKING ME CINDJECTIVE!
Post by: hops on September 17, 2015, 08:57:32 pm
/me ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Post by: Orange Wizard on September 17, 2015, 09:29:25 pm
Post by: Calidovi on September 17, 2015, 09:33:35 pm
Post by: SirQuiamus on September 18, 2015, 06:39:01 am
Post by: Calidovi on October 17, 2015, 08:57:50 am
Spoiler: =It's quite a lengthy-ish story, but not a Finnish one. (click to show/hide)
Post by: SirQuiamus on October 17, 2015, 09:54:43 am
Spoiler: Derail (click to show/hide)
Post by: Reudh on October 17, 2015, 10:00:02 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 21, 2015, 01:12:11 pm
You are a bourgeois patriot. 13 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 35 percent are more extremist than you. (http://politicaltest.net/en/test/result/4948)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on November 21, 2015, 02:28:47 pm
Spoiler: But it was apparently enough to put me in the 1% (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: But seriously, my actual results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Ghazkull on November 21, 2015, 04:18:27 pm
Spoiler: Patriotic Authoritarian Socialist (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheDarkStar on November 21, 2015, 04:28:22 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on November 21, 2015, 04:46:35 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on November 21, 2015, 04:52:35 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Baffler on November 21, 2015, 04:56:10 pm
Spoiler: Result (click to show/hide)
3% of other test takers were in my category, "patriotic and authoritarian socialist," and 95% of those were more radical.
Post by: IronyOwl on November 21, 2015, 05:01:47 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm not sure what to make of this.If I had to guess, you're not matching the perceived categories very well, which leads to an incoherent-looking result, which makes you look both rare and not very dedicated to whatever it is it thinks you are.Spoiler: Result (click to show/hide)
2% of other test takers were in my category, "patriotic and authoritarian socialist," and 95% of those were more radical.
Kind of like if we were measuring food preference by how many calories it had, but somebody didn't care as much about the calories as the protein content. There's still a measurable result, but it looks peculiar.
Post by: Itnetlolor on November 21, 2015, 05:28:12 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
In summary, I'm pretty much apathetic about everything nowadays. TO THE APATHY PARTY!!! (Shit. I'm unacceptable. Oh well... Wait... Now I'm re-invited?) (https://youtu.be/oELL7hfKYfA)
Post by: Shadowlord on November 21, 2015, 05:58:57 pm
Got this:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
They have a banner for if you use an ad blocker. Did anyone else notice they spelled Political as Polititcal in it?
(http://politicaltest.net/images/disable-adblock.png)
Some of these questions are odd. Like "Solidarity has to be an obligation for all citizens." I clicked agree because I REMEMBER EVERYTHING and assume it's a reference (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solidarity_%28Polish_trade_union%29).
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 21, 2015, 06:23:39 pm
Spoiler: Result (click to show/hide)
Looks about right.
Post by: MaximumZero on November 21, 2015, 06:38:26 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 21, 2015, 06:48:53 pm
Post by: Mr. Strange on November 21, 2015, 06:52:02 pm
snipCan't unsee.
I willl refer to you as "SirSurkimus" in my mind from now on.
Spoiler: Polititcal results (click to show/hide)
Post by: SirQuiamus on November 21, 2015, 07:14:02 pm
I'm trying to roll a lawful good hippielf rangerlord but I can't get past 93% in ecologicalism.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tawa on November 21, 2015, 07:37:58 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mr. Strange on November 21, 2015, 08:17:29 pm
I'm trying to roll a lawful good hippielf rangerlord but I can't get past 93% in ecologicalism."Lawfull" and "good" might contradict some of the required choices, try hating people more.
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 21, 2015, 09:42:56 pm
and liberals
damn american politics in general really
Post by: MaximumZero on November 22, 2015, 03:34:01 am
Post by: Cheeetar on November 22, 2015, 04:21:14 am
Spoiler: Result (click to show/hide)
Post by: Flying Dice on November 22, 2015, 09:55:54 am
Spoiler: Just plain soc-dem for me. (click to show/hide)
Post by: notquitethere on November 22, 2015, 11:27:15 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Baffler on November 22, 2015, 03:27:29 pm
Bay12 is pretty damn well in lockstep on this one, at least compared to the other forum I shared this test on. The only major differences I notice here are on the Ecological/Anthropocentric axis.
Post by: Criptfeind on November 22, 2015, 08:40:06 pm
Me, too.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm 30 points less secular, I feel like I've failed in some way.
Post by: MaximumZero on November 22, 2015, 09:51:58 pm
You really shouldn't. I'm a "new wave angry atheist." Yes, I can be an obnoxious twat about it.Me, too.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I'm 30 points less secular, I feel like I've failed in some way.
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 23, 2015, 03:59:27 am
...
Took the test again, got social democratic cosmopolitan. Shock, horror.
Spoiler: The numbers are different (click to show/hide)
Post by: Arx on November 23, 2015, 05:09:52 am
It might also be because I only say something's very important to me if I really mean it, and most of the questions were too vague for me to say whether or not I seriously approved/disapproved.
Post by: Orange Wizard on November 23, 2015, 06:15:09 am
Which personally I find weird, because I consider myself fundamentalist in the sense that I hold to the fundamental points of my religion and the rest is more lenient. But fundamentalist in common parlance means... taking even extraneous and irrelevant things as srs bsns and shouting/shooting down all who oppose you?
Putnam is probably cursing me right now, "y u no accept language changes".
Post by: Flying Dice on November 23, 2015, 06:57:33 am
You can be a Christian who believes in the fundamental tenets of Christianity without being a fundamentalist, because the "fundamental tenets" are ambiguous and open to interpretation. A fundamentalist is someone who believes that because the Bible says that Noah built a giant boat and kept two of every animal plus his family on board when God flooded the entire world that literally happened, that Adam and Eve really existed and are really the progenitors of the entire human race, and that Eve was literally made by God carving out one of Adam's ribs.
Post by: Gentlefish on December 01, 2015, 04:23:41 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I knew I was extreme but wow. I am the freakin' Cardinal of Soc-Dems.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 05, 2016, 07:53:33 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Solifuge on April 06, 2016, 06:46:29 pm
http://www.musicaluniverse.org/ (http://www.musicaluniverse.org/)
Finished the Musical Taste quiz. Might do the rest later, but each one is a decent chunk of questions.
Quote
Musical Preferences
Here are your musical preference scores:
Your preference score for Mellow music: 33 (Very High)
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 27 (Very High)
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 37 (Very High)
Your preference score for Intense music: 29 (Average)
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 28 (Very High)
Personality
Here are your personality scores. Scores range from 1 to 7.
On Extraversion you scored: 4.5 (Avg. 4.44)
On Agreeableness you scored: 5 (Avg. 5.23)
On Openness to Experience you scored: 7 (Avg. 5.38)
On Conscientiousness you scored: 3 (Avg. 5.40)
On Emotional Stability you scored: 3 (Avg. 4.83)
Satisfaction with Life
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 17 (Below Average)
Sounds about right. Curious about how the two data sets relate, but I guess that's what the study itself is trying to figure out!
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on April 06, 2016, 09:55:26 pm
You are Cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 40 percent are more extremist than you.
... Huh.
Post by: Orange Wizard on April 06, 2016, 10:04:14 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on April 07, 2016, 12:33:59 am
Quote
Musical Preferences
Here are your musical preference scores:
Your preference score for Mellow music: 26 (Avg: 22-26)
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 6 (Avg: 15-20)
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 21 (Avg: 22-27)
Your preference score for Intense music: 40(!) (Avg: 25-30)
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 22 (Avg: 18-22)
Personality
Here are your personality scores. Scores range from 1 to 7.
On Extraversion you scored: 1(!) (Avg. 4.44)
On Agreeableness you scored: 2.5 (Avg. 5.23)
On Openness to Experience you scored: 6.5 (Avg. 5.38)
On Conscientiousness you scored: 5 (Avg. 5.40)
On Emotional Stability you scored: 4 (Avg. 4.83)
Satisfaction with Life
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 8 (Extremely Dissatisfied)
Post by: Wolfeyez on April 07, 2016, 12:49:57 am
Here are your musical preference scores:
Your preference score for Mellow music: 22 (Avg: 22-26)
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 11 (Avg: 15-20)
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 27 (Avg: 22-27)
Your preference score for Intense music: 40 (Avg: 25-30)
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 33 (Avg: 18-22)
Personality
Here are your personality scores. Scores range from 1 to 7.
On Extraversion you scored: 5 (Avg. 4.44)
On Agreeableness you scored: 5 (Avg. 5.23)
On Openness to Experience you scored: 4 (Avg. 5.38)
On Conscientiousness you scored: 3 (Avg. 5.40)
On Emotional Stability you scored: 3.5 (Avg. 4.83)
Satisfaction with Life
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 14 (Dissatisfied)
Post by: Powder Miner on April 07, 2016, 01:15:00 am
http://politicaltest.net/en/test/result/68365
FREEDOM
Post by: Putnam on April 07, 2016, 01:18:14 am
Thanks to Solifuge for finding this. http://www.musicaluniverse.org/ (http://www.musicaluniverse.org/)
Your preference score for Mellow music: 40
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 30
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 41
Your preference score for Intense music: 35
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 37
On Extraversion you scored: 5
On Agreeableness you scored: 5.5
On Openness to Experience you scored: 5.5
On Conscientiousness you scored: 2
On Emotional Stability you scored: 6
Huh, who'da thunk. This is basically my jam, so I'm unsurprised. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8JxrjCHHIE)
Also, I got far above average in preference every single category of music. That I am also unsurprised by.
Post by: Tiruin on April 07, 2016, 01:42:41 am
Thanks to Solifuge for finding this. http://www.musicaluniverse.org/ (http://www.musicaluniverse.org/)Hum ._.
Musical Taste (Actually Musical preference, was wondering where other people were talking about :P):
Quote
Your preference score for Mellow music: 31
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 25
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 34
Your preference score for Intense music: 13
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 17
Quote
On Extraversion you scored: 3.5
On Agreeableness you scored: 6.5
On Openness to Experience you scored: 6
On Conscientiousness you scored: 4.5
On Emotional Stability you scored: 4.5
Quote
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 18Huh o_O That's pretty different in some parts from the tests I took physically.
Scores range from 5 to 35.
Post by: MaximumZero on April 07, 2016, 01:56:31 am
Your preference score for Mellow music: 40How about some Alice in Chains (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83gddxVpitc)?
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 30
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 41
Your preference score for Intense music: 35
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 37
Post by: sjm9876 on April 07, 2016, 06:51:57 am
Quote
Your preference score for Mellow music: 32 (Avg: 22-26)
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 28 (Avg: 15-20)
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 24 (Avg: 22-27)
Your preference score for Intense music: 35 (Avg: 25-30)
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 11 (Avg: 18-22)
No surprises here.
Quote
On Extraversion you scored: 2 (4.44)
On Agreeableness you scored: 4.5 (5.23)
On Openness to Experience you scored: 6 (5.38)
On Conscientiousness you scored: 4 (5.40)
On Emotional Stability you scored: 5.5 (4.83)
Not entirely accurate as I'd recognise, but pretty close for the number of questions on it.
Quote
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 24 (Average)
Fairly unsurprising, all in all.
Post by: notquitethere on April 07, 2016, 08:24:22 am
Quote
Your preference score for Mellow music: 23Folk and jazz are great; metal, RnB, and contemporary pop not so much.
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 31
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 38
Your preference score for Intense music: 15
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 12
Quote
On Extraversion you scored: 6Philosopher King reporting in.
On Agreeableness you scored: 6
On Openness to Experience you scored: 6.5
On Conscientiousness you scored: 5
On Emotional Stability you scored: 7
Quote
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 24Mostly brought down because, like anyone who gave it any thought, I'd definitely change a lot if I relived my life.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on April 07, 2016, 11:49:52 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on April 07, 2016, 11:57:01 am
I have a new challenge for you, people.... . . Wouldn't it be very hard for whichever choice we've made since it's originally an uninhabited island in the first place? :( Poor fish-person wouldn't survive. (I'd pick A, I guess o_O)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Haspen on April 07, 2016, 12:13:16 pm
@Solifuge:
Quote
Here are your musical preference scores:
Your preference score for Mellow music: 22
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 14
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 31
Your preference score for Intense music: 20
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 22
Here are your personality scores. Scores range from 1 to 7.
On Extraversion you scored: 1.5
On Agreeableness you scored: 4.5
On Openness to Experience you scored: 4.5
On Conscientiousness you scored: 3.5
On Emotional Stability you scored: 2
Satisfaction with Life
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 20
Do you know what Excerpt 18 is? It was good and is now stuck in my head v:
Post by: Skyrunner on April 07, 2016, 12:18:49 pm
Post by: Solifuge on April 07, 2016, 01:04:54 pm
Plus, if she can use that aquatic mobility to handle fishing, I can spend more time on tool making and fresh water and long term survival stuff. Win win!
Post by: Arx on April 07, 2016, 02:52:24 pm
Quote
Your preference score for Mellow music: 32
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 25
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 32
Your preference score for Intense music: 38
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 14
On Extraversion you scored: 1
On Agreeableness you scored: 4.5
On Openness to Experience you scored: 6
On Conscientiousness you scored: 5
On Emotional Stability you scored: 3.5
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 24
About right. I enjoy most genres of music, but most kinds of contemporary less than others.
Post by: Uristides on April 08, 2016, 06:15:53 am
Ermagod, yer a commie Harry!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
A bit curious how they incorporated the how you play music answers into the results too. I just rated everything low because "absolutely shit" was not among the options.
Post by: Calidovi on April 18, 2016, 06:07:49 pm
I have a new challenge for you, people...Spoiler (click to show/hide)
B (I'm assuming that she can breathe air as mermaids can use water for respiration.)
-Can use salt water
-Can bring fish to the homeland
-Kicks like a muhfugger
-Doesn't need cooked food and a varied diet
-Can ride bike, perfect getaway vehicle for island chase
-Skull deflects imperial Japanese coconut bombs
-qt3.14 bone structure
-Does not need to be carried around the island, yet another liability if on land and a threat arises
If she had arms, though, it'd be a definite pick. If I wanted someone talking to me about random nonsense I'd just check my phone.
Post by: SquatchHammer on April 19, 2016, 06:40:10 pm
Post by: Wolfhunter107 on April 19, 2016, 07:21:03 pm
I suspect it's skewed a little due to being designed for Germans rather than Americans, but still pretty neat.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on April 20, 2016, 04:35:40 pm
"INTPs are pensive, analytical folks. They may venture so deeply into thought as to seem detached, and often actually are oblivious to the world around them." Yep, that's me.
"You are Social-democratic Cosmopolitan. 6 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 0 percent are more extremist than you." Yep, I'm definitely "extreme."
I am a Cosmopolitan, Secular, Visionary, Anarchist, Communistic, Pacifist, Ecological kind of person.
Cosmopolitan: 90%
Secular: 94%
Visionary: 93%
Anarchist: 50%
Communistic: 89%
Pacifist: 48%
Ecological: 50% (http://politicaltest.net/en/test/result/71782)
Post by: MaximumZero on April 20, 2016, 07:25:52 pm
I have a new challenge for you, people...Neither. If I'm alone on an uninhabited island, I probably got that way on purpose.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: chaotic skies on April 20, 2016, 08:44:09 pm
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on April 20, 2016, 10:21:52 pm
Post by: chaotic skies on April 20, 2016, 10:48:37 pm
Post by: Cruxador on April 25, 2016, 01:48:02 am
Your preference score for Mellow music: 25
Your preference score for Unpretentious music 27
Your preference score for Sophisticated music: 28
Your preference score for Intense music: 29
Your preference score for Contemporary music: 32
Pretty much accurate, though it doesn't necessarily reflect the kinds of things I look for in music.
On Extraversion you scored: 1
On Agreeableness you scored: 4
On Openness to Experience you scored: 5
On Conscientiousness you scored: 3
On Emotional Stability you scored: 6.5
The agreeable score seems like it should be higher than average based on their description. Otherwise seems about right.
Your score on Life Satisfaction was: 13
Probably would be lower if I hadn't said I'd live my life the same way again, which they probably inferred meaning into that wasn't there.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 02, 2016, 06:29:47 pm
Post by: Cruxador on May 02, 2016, 08:20:36 pm
For anyone who prefers it, here it is (http://imgur.com/0OwD04Y). I expect most people with internet and the free time to use it for this kind of thing will fall between 1000 and 2000.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 02, 2016, 08:33:13 pm
Post by: Reudh on May 03, 2016, 06:32:28 pm
You live with 59 out of 100 points of privilege. You’re quite privileged. (https://www.buzzfeed.com/regajha/how-privileged-are-you)
I was partway through that when I had to look up Sallie Mae. I guess I'm privileged because I don't know a company in another nation that does student loans? Ugh, buzzfeed pls.
Post by: Cruxador on May 03, 2016, 09:17:35 pm
You have the privilege of not being an American, and/or not getting post-secondary education.You live with 59 out of 100 points of privilege. You’re quite privileged. (https://www.buzzfeed.com/regajha/how-privileged-are-you)
I was partway through that when I had to look up Sallie Mae. I guess I'm privileged because I don't know a company in another nation that does student loans? Ugh, buzzfeed pls.
Post by: Madmachine on May 03, 2016, 09:30:15 pm
Post by: Cruxador on May 03, 2016, 09:39:08 pm
The privilege checklists begin to fall apart if you don't live in 'Murrica, and completely fall apart if you don't live in Europe either.The buzzfeed one does. What hurts the one I posted in more diverse circumstances?
Post by: Madmachine on May 03, 2016, 11:12:45 pm
The entire race section.The privilege checklists begin to fall apart if you don't live in 'Murrica, and completely fall apart if you don't live in Europe either.The buzzfeed one does. What hurts the one I posted in more diverse circumstances?
Post by: Cruxador on May 03, 2016, 11:50:13 pm
How would you rank races in an international way, then? What specific circumstance(s) do you have that isn't appropriately represented by the mechanic?The entire race section.The privilege checklists begin to fall apart if you don't live in 'Murrica, and completely fall apart if you don't live in Europe either.The buzzfeed one does. What hurts the one I posted in more diverse circumstances?
Post by: Sirus on May 03, 2016, 11:57:44 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 04, 2016, 01:26:33 am
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 04, 2016, 07:23:43 am
Here's my ranking!How would you rank races in an international way, then? What specific circumstance(s) do you have that isn't appropriately represented by the mechanic?The entire race section.The privilege checklists begin to fall apart if you don't live in 'Murrica, and completely fall apart if you don't live in Europe either.The buzzfeed one does. What hurts the one I posted in more diverse circumstances?
#1 - This entire thing is stupid.
#2 - This is only going to end in bans.
#3 - The OP of the thread already said to stop.
#4 - If you don't stop, both of you are going to end up reported.
Post by: MaximumZero on May 05, 2016, 05:24:55 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 05, 2016, 06:00:44 am
Me (https://www.politicalcompass.org/yourpoliticalcompass?ec=-6.13&soc=-2.36)
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 05, 2016, 06:15:24 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
All odd as every time I take these I keep expecting to float in topright corner yet keep ending up in Stalin or Gandhi corner
Post by: TheDarkStar on May 05, 2016, 10:19:12 pm
Post by: TD1 on May 06, 2016, 09:35:46 am
Emmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Suuuure.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 06, 2016, 09:49:58 am
Post by: Cruxador on May 06, 2016, 12:23:31 pm
There must be some questions that are just so heavily weighted that if you tick their boxes the right way you always end up bottom leftEither that or Bay12Games tends to have a left-leaning liberal crowd.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 06, 2016, 02:10:07 pm
Yeah that would make sense for Bay12 but I'm talking personally, where like in Europol thread people say I sound like a reactionary. Yet my attempts to reach topright end in damned frustration, the gravitational pull of Mahatma Stalin is too powerful to escape - so I think there must be a few questions that are just so heavily weighted that if you pick them then everything else becomes mostly irrelevantThere must be some questions that are just so heavily weighted that if you tick their boxes the right way you always end up bottom leftEither that or Bay12Games tends to have a left-leaning liberal crowd.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 06, 2016, 07:55:06 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 06, 2016, 08:25:29 pm
Post by: TD1 on May 07, 2016, 11:54:47 am
Don't worry though - people in that area are quite susceptible to fast falls from power.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 07, 2016, 11:58:45 am
Post by: AzyWng on May 07, 2016, 09:58:32 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 07, 2016, 09:59:44 pm
Post by: AzyWng on May 07, 2016, 10:16:05 pm
Woah, an extroverted Bay12er. Congrats.That's by 6 percent.
Also, I'm not quite sure I fully thought through the questions or that that's exactly a cause for congratulations.
Eh, whatever.
Anyway, even though I'm still attending high school and really don't want any involvement with politics and the messes that surround it AND didn't exactly have an answer for some of the questions the quiz asked:
ME! (https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2?ec=-1.38&soc=-2.0)
Post by: AzyWng on May 07, 2016, 10:18:10 pm
the gravitational pull of Mahatma Stalin is too powerful to escape
Sigged.
Post by: Putnam on May 07, 2016, 10:57:30 pm
Woah, an extroverted Bay12er. Congrats.
Oh, come on, I've posted mine before. Just took it again.
You have moderate preference of Extraversion over Introversion (53%)
You have slight preference of Intuition over Sensing (22%)
You have slight preference of Feeling over Thinking (16%)
You have moderate preference of Perceiving over Judging (28%)
I'm pretty well into extraversion.
EDIT:
Quote
ENFPs are both "idea"-people
NOOOO
Quote
and "people"-people
okay
Quote
who see everyone and everything as part of a cosmic whole.
wow that's Jung as fuck
EDIT: I found this
https://www.xeromag.com/fun/personality.html
Quote
Famous ENFPs include anyone who has ever dated Tom Cruise.
Post by: Tiruin on May 08, 2016, 02:15:38 am
Woah, an extroverted Bay12er. Congrats.If there were any legitimate online Psychology tests, I would have merit in punching this statement. :P
But yeah. >_> It bugs me a bit when people begin classifying others as introverted and extroverted when those are merely personality characteristic descriptors. Very broad and general characteristic descriptors.
/me shakes fist at how interpretations have developed. Rawwwr Carl Jung!
Seriously would love to be posting on what extraversion/intraversion are in specifics because I see many people getting confused. <_<
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 08, 2016, 05:17:54 am
Also political compass. (https://www.politicalcompass.org/yourpoliticalcompass?ec=-5.38&soc=-5.33)
Also another Cosmopolitan Social Democrat for the pile. (http://politicaltest.net/en/test/result/78839)
Post by: AzyWng on May 08, 2016, 05:57:59 pm
Sigged.Woah, an extroverted Bay12er. Congrats.If there were any legitimate online Psychology tests, I would have merit in punching this statement. :P
Post by: hops on May 09, 2016, 02:55:26 am
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 09, 2016, 02:58:43 am
Post by: TheDarkStar on May 09, 2016, 09:49:21 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on May 09, 2016, 11:25:22 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Solifuge on May 09, 2016, 07:46:49 pm
http://personality-testing.info/tests/RWAS/ (http://personality-testing.info/tests/RWAS/)
Apparently I'm 5.68% Right-Wing Authoritarian. What do I do now, get an operation to cut that bit out and donate it to Orange Wizard?
In other news: what the hell OP, let's revisit Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs handiwork one more time.
INFP: Introvert(50%) iNtuitive(31%) Feeling(53%) Perceiving(28%)
Old Me used to come up as INTP or borderline Feeling/Thinking more often, but I think I might've been forcing that aspect of my personality for cultural reasons. I think this fits a lot better.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 09, 2016, 07:51:27 pm
gulag wen
Post by: Powder Miner on May 09, 2016, 07:52:11 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on May 09, 2016, 08:38:49 pm
Screw the man, man!
Post by: Arx on May 10, 2016, 05:17:24 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 10, 2016, 09:25:37 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 10, 2016, 09:38:56 am
"Your score for right-wing authoritarianism was 60.23%."Ban this sick filfth
Post by: Sl4cker on May 10, 2016, 09:51:47 am
i've always wanted to burn down my school, too
Post by: Culise on May 10, 2016, 03:26:26 pm
Post by: AzyWng on May 10, 2016, 05:28:15 pm
Quote from: Results of the Right-Wing Authoritarianism Scale
Your score for right-wing authoritarianism was 23.86%. Higher scores indicate more right-wing authoritarianism.Maybe that was because I interpreted some of the questions/inferred some things or didn't answer "very strongly" for as many questions?
To be honest, if this is actual politics stuff and right-wing is traditionalist values, my political tendencies might be more to the left.
Not that I know jack about politics since I despised it as a (younger) child...
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 05:39:44 pm
Post by: Rubidium on May 10, 2016, 05:55:48 pm
Spoiler: everything (click to show/hide)
Where is this test?http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes1.htm
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 10, 2016, 05:57:28 pm
Where is this test?
SHIT, LET'S BE RIGHT-WING AUTHORITARIANS:
http://personality-testing.info/tests/RWAS/
E: Also:
INTJ
Introvert(88%) iNtuitive(25%) Thinking(62%) Judging(31%)
I think I'm normally INTP.
Post by: Tawa on May 10, 2016, 06:01:47 pm
Hence my frustration when I hear somebody say that communism and socialism are the same thing.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 10, 2016, 06:03:21 pm
communism and socialism are the same thing.No, that's just ignorance. My score was an order of magnitude higher than yours and I also get frustrated by it.
Post by: Tawa on May 10, 2016, 06:07:38 pm
I DO NOT WANT ARGUE D:
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 10, 2016, 06:39:20 pm
Quote
Your score for right-wing authoritarianism was 11.36%
I think I might've gotten a slightly higher score than I should've, but who knows.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 10, 2016, 06:47:18 pm
I WAS JOKESorry, I should have added a :P
I DO NOT WANT ARGUE D:
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on May 11, 2016, 03:56:03 am
I WAS JOKEdon't you mean PRAISE THE MOTHERLAND
I DO NOT WANT ARGUE D:
Post by: Cruxador on May 11, 2016, 11:45:26 am
SHIT, LET'S BE RIGHT-WING AUTHORITARIANS:Bit of a shit test, a lot of questions conflate stuff. Like for example,
http://personality-testing.info/tests/RWAS/ (http://personality-testing.info/tests/RWAS/)
Quote
Our country desperately needs a mighty leader who will do what has to be done to destroy the radical new ways and sinfulness that are ruining us.What if these ways aren't new any more, but are well-established? And the opposition between legitimate authority and "noisy rabble-rousers" ignores the fact that the kind of movements it's ostensibly dealing with tend to be novel at their height, and thus arise in opposition to existing social order. Both Hitler and Donald Trump chose to run against an existing establishment that people aren't happy with, so this question is both historically stupid and not relevant to contemporary topics.
Honestly, this seems like some left wing academic Californian's "are you a bad guy" test. The only purpose it serves is giving you a low score or demonizing you for getting a high one, while allowing its creator to pat himself on the back for not getting a real job.
List of especially dumb statements:
- Atheists and others who have rebelled against the established religions are no doubt every bit as good and virtuous as those who attend church regularly. (Equivalent goodness could just as well be a negative, if answered by a fedora tipper)
- There is absolutely nothing wrong with nudist camps. (What does nudism have to do with authoritarianism? There's way too many reasons to have either opinion on this)
- Our country will be destroyed someday if... (Every country is destroyed eventually)
- A "woman's place" should be wherever she wants to be. The days when women are submissive to their husbands and social conventions belong strictly in the past.(A woman can do what she wants unless she wants what I don't want)
I ended up with a 46%, probably because I could think of caveats for most things and didn't use the extreme descriptors much at all. I would argue that this is, in fact, an indicator against the sort of dangerous thought patterns that this test endeavors to identify.
I WAS JOKEStill are to be honest family
Post by: Solifuge on May 11, 2016, 08:32:23 pm
I personally know a large number of people who (from what I know of their opinions) would easily rank above 60 on the test. Try to step outside the mindset of the culture in which you exist today, and try to look at it from a dispassionate and honest perspective. These mindsets may be rare among the young, but they're not uncommon, let alone over the entire world.
Post by: Cruxador on May 12, 2016, 12:02:06 pm
Consider for a moment that it was originally worded and written in 1947, right after the end of World War 2. If the opinions seem extreme or absurd, consider that those extreme mindsets did indeed exist (and strongly so) as the majority opinion in several major world powers at the time.Except the problem with it isn't "nobody thinks like that" it's "this is overly specific and conflates unrelated things". Now, I know it's old and we've made a lot of progress since then in both the understanding of the underlying principles of political thought, but if it's being posted for use rather than mere historical curiosity (e.g. "look how incompetent people used to be about collecting useful data!") it should be dealt with in a modern context. What's worse is that the end of the test asks for permission to use your results in research, which implies that somebody is actually using this ancient test for research purposes right now.
Post by: TempAcc on May 12, 2016, 12:22:11 pm
Extravert(1%) Sensing(6%) Thinking(16%) Judging(25%)
You have marginal or no preference of Extraversion over Introversion (1%)
You have slight preference of Sensing over Intuition (6%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (16%)
You have moderate preference of Judging over Perceiving (25%)
:v I'm an amoeba
This reminds me of that one time I did the kinsey's sexuality test thing and the grade I got said that the test coudn't determine my preferences because apparently I'm a tentacle monster.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 02:12:37 pm
Post by: TempAcc on May 12, 2016, 02:27:20 pm
Test is far from being perfect, though, and I personaly find it a bit silly, but apparently I bork'd it.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 02:40:00 pm
Post by: TD1 on May 12, 2016, 04:09:00 pm
Below is the Kinsey scale, your result has been highlighted.
0 Exclusively heterosexual.
Well, I knew that, but thanks for telling me internet! :P
Post by: Tawa on May 12, 2016, 04:14:10 pm
This reminds me of that one time I did the kinsey's sexuality test thing and the grade I got said that the test coudn't determine my preferences because apparently I'm a tentacle monster.Tentacle monsters, unite!
Which is weird, because their "1" sounds about right for me.
Post by: Putnam on May 12, 2016, 05:25:17 pm
Post by: hops on May 12, 2016, 06:13:50 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 12, 2016, 08:12:16 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 12, 2016, 08:16:47 pm
Post by: AzyWng on May 12, 2016, 08:25:57 pm
Uh, how can I revote?
Note: "3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual."
Post by: hops on May 12, 2016, 09:55:35 pm
I failed.
I also failed.0/10 not gay enough
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 09:57:19 pm
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 12, 2016, 10:20:04 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 10:20:38 pm
Odds are the test is crap.... Yeah, I'm gonna go with that.
Post by: Tiruin on May 12, 2016, 10:35:24 pm
http://vistriai.com/kinseyscaletest/ (http://vistriai.com/kinseyscaletest/)
Test is far from being perfect, though, and I personaly find it a bit silly, but apparently I bork'd it.
I like that last sentence of "If you think the test is wrong, it is.[...]"
What the spork, B12, how are we all failing this badly at this?Y'all aren't failing. The test is (failing to measure what characteristics it was built to measure). :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 10:37:47 pm
Post by: Culise on May 12, 2016, 10:58:15 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 12, 2016, 11:04:16 pm
Post by: hops on May 12, 2016, 11:04:24 pm
Post by: Tiruin on May 12, 2016, 11:12:56 pm
I think the issue with the test is that it doesn't work too well on sapioromantic nerds.The issue is also that online tests really lack balancing, and context, and many other factors that actually make it..."work."
Two measures like reliability and validity--a test can be valid, but not reliable. For a test to be reliable, it also needs to be valid.
The linkie there isn't matching up with any of these because of how...lacking it is. :P
That, and we're using a very, very old scale.
E: But it is passing fun! I think!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 11:23:13 pm
I think the issue with the test is that it doesn't work too well on sapioromantic nerds.I like that word.
Indeed.I think the issue with the test is that it doesn't work too well on sapioromantic nerds.The issue is also that online tests really lack balancing, and context, and many other factors that actually make it..."work."
Two measures like reliability and validity--a test can be valid, but not reliable. For a test to be reliable, it also needs to be valid.
The linkie there isn't matching up with any of these because of how...lacking it is. :P
That, and we're using a very, very old scale.
E: But it is passing fun! I think!
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 12, 2016, 11:42:53 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 12, 2016, 11:44:40 pm
Why not.
Let's do this thing.
Post by: hops on May 13, 2016, 12:16:29 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 13, 2016, 12:17:40 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 13, 2016, 12:44:57 am
Post by: Cruxador on May 13, 2016, 01:35:52 am
I think it should be 3-dimensional. One axis concern secondary sexual characteristics, one concern personality, and one concern submission/domination.I think you're overcomplicating the situation. Two axes would be for the "you gay, bro?" question. To map all of sexuality, we'd need more dimensions than the best mathematicians can begin to comprehend. But for just gayness, you can have a sexual axis and a romantic axis. It's still flawed because it can be misleading to not have some way to indicate the relative importance of those two aspects, or their total importance for that matter, but since those are fairly dynamic thing anyway, I'd be inclined to suppose that this is fin, but put a little explanation about it at the end. Or use multiple output graphics, if the intent would be to create a more comprehensive assessment.
Post by: Skyrunner on May 13, 2016, 01:59:01 am
Post by: Sirus on May 13, 2016, 02:28:25 am
...well shit, I coulda told you that :P
Post by: hops on May 13, 2016, 03:34:02 am
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 13, 2016, 04:35:49 am
Is this what the PUAs call a "shit test?"
Post by: TD1 on May 13, 2016, 04:38:16 am
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 13, 2016, 04:40:21 am
Post by: Frumple on May 13, 2016, 04:45:54 am
Swear to the non-existent gods, if I have somehow ended up with the superpower of unintentionally answering multiple choice questions correctly, I am going to hurt something.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 13, 2016, 04:58:43 am
B12 tentacle monster 1% crewGoing by the poll it's more like 40%
Post by: karhell on May 13, 2016, 05:02:00 am
Post by: Haspen on May 13, 2016, 05:10:51 am
Huh.
Post by: Itnetlolor on May 13, 2016, 05:08:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 13, 2016, 06:29:08 pm
All falses will get you an F, which is kind of appropriate.
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 13, 2016, 07:23:20 pm
Post by: helmacon on May 14, 2016, 12:26:42 pm
I never thought the day would come when i took a buzzfeed test....
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on May 14, 2016, 08:37:09 pm
Post by: Sirus on May 14, 2016, 10:42:10 pm
Such macho, very man. :Ppffft, I'm not macho at all :P
The test only rates sexual preferences, not manliness/womanliness/<undefined>iness.
Post by: hops on May 14, 2016, 11:53:46 pm
A tually I don't know why but I need to write a thing where the Kinsey Scale works like power levels now.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 15, 2016, 12:22:55 am
Post by: hops on May 15, 2016, 01:28:56 am
Post by: Solifuge on May 15, 2016, 02:00:42 am
Too romantically attracted to dudes to Gay, too non-binary to Straight. Such is my lot.
Post by: MaximumZero on May 15, 2016, 08:56:52 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 15, 2016, 09:38:33 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 15, 2016, 10:24:31 am
http://vistriai.com/kinseyscaletest/ (http://vistriai.com/kinseyscaletest/)
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 15, 2016, 10:31:10 am
One would also think the question of who you are exclusively attracted to would not make it a scale
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 15, 2016, 10:34:24 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 15, 2016, 10:39:15 am
I got a 3 which is supposed to be equally homosex and straight, which is bullshit because this test doesn't even factor traps making it an FNever change, memester.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on May 20, 2016, 07:36:12 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 20, 2016, 07:47:15 am
Sexual attraction's just weird IMODo you even puberty
Post by: birdy51 on May 20, 2016, 07:56:04 am
Post by: TD1 on May 20, 2016, 08:05:32 am
Sexual attraction's just weird IMODo you even puberty
By 15, probably.
Post by: hops on May 20, 2016, 08:42:23 am
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on May 20, 2016, 08:46:05 am
Spoiler: given the conversation, you can guess what's being discussed (click to show/hide)
Ninja: I am a hardcore neek or gerd. But I'm not sure what libido has to do with anything. Isn't that reflectivity of astronomical bodies...
*facepalm* that's albedo. I should know this, I'm at Nationals for Science Olympiad doing Astronomy! Nvm, I know what libido is. Don't have it.
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 20, 2016, 09:08:08 am
...X. I wonder if I'm one of the youngest here, since I correctly predicted that the test would throw its hands up and say "WHY ARE YOU HERE YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OF THESE FEELINGS". Sexual attraction's just weird IMO, but I don't really care if others have it.Probably just you, the test itself, or a mess on my end, considering I took it for kicks and got a 3.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 20, 2016, 06:59:41 pm
And have porn/fantasies while doing so?
Probably straddling the forum guidelines a little here, but sex drive doesn't need to be directed at people.
Post by: Helgoland on May 20, 2016, 07:40:48 pm
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on May 20, 2016, 11:28:48 pm
I understand the concept of masturbation. I attempted it once, scientifically. A stiff piece of flesh on my body did not lead to any happiness, good feelings, or whatnot. Hm. I guess my body's technically gone through puberty. Weird that I'm entirely asexual and amasturbatic or something.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 21, 2016, 12:23:45 am
Wanker = One who masturbates (negative connotations, used pejoratively, interchangeable with bashman)
Post by: Cruxador on May 21, 2016, 01:50:30 am
Wank = Fap = Male masturbation = Jack off = Working a German method of coal extraction"Well, things didn't go too well this evening so I might just be working a German method of coal extraction tonight."
Post by: hops on May 21, 2016, 05:13:21 am
Although he's about the same age as flame99 so I guess I might just be the world's most unintentional perv :P
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on May 21, 2016, 08:25:48 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 21, 2016, 09:09:37 am
Post by: TempAcc on May 21, 2016, 09:34:17 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 21, 2016, 01:29:08 pm
It's cos you're working on mein shaftWank = Fap = Male masturbation = Jack off = Working a German method of coal extraction"Well, things didn't go too well this evening so I might just be working a German method of coal extraction tonight."
TIL what peri- meant.
Spoiler: I dunno (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cruxador on May 21, 2016, 10:08:38 pm
TIL what peri- meant.Me too:
Quote from: Google
(in Persian mythology) a mythical superhuman being, originally represented as evil but subsequently as a good or graceful genie or fairy.
Jesus Christ did I accidentally start a conversation regarding a peri-pubescent boy's sexuality?Perhaps You Are A Pedophile
Although he's about the same age as flame99 so I guess I might just be the world's most unintentional perv :P
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 21, 2016, 10:18:19 pm
Around.
Post by: hops on May 21, 2016, 11:52:33 pm
Post by: Tiruin on May 22, 2016, 12:03:39 am
Jesus Christ did I... :oI don't see the connection and I think the discussion could go on BETTER paths from here than the sidecomments now thanks ._.
It seems to have rather started by Orange Wizard's comment.
But seriously, edit it all out. >_>
Back to most-likely flawed and-for-fun-only tests online please?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 22, 2016, 12:25:52 am
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 22, 2016, 01:15:56 am
Post by: Cruxador on May 22, 2016, 01:17:15 am
Iconoclasts care not for your rules.Iconoclasts care not for your idolatry. Not quite the same thing.
Post by: Sirus on May 22, 2016, 01:18:19 am
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 22, 2016, 01:18:48 am
A word can have multiple meanings, right?Iconoclasts care not for your rules.Iconoclasts care not for your idolatry. Not quite the same thing.
Post by: Tiruin on May 22, 2016, 01:20:31 am
Did...did some posts get deleted or?It's still there and I think it should be edited out by the respectful posters. :v
Because there's a gap between discussing libido (given the context of the word) and then its relative attributions.
BASED ON A FLAWED, SINGULAR, NON-PARALLEL TEST. :I
The psychometrician in me is rolling around wrapped in a carpet.
I mean honestly, there's nothing wrong with the discussion as it is now, but it's turning a tinge of eeurgh ._.; given how wide and vague several attributions and associations from the test is being turned into a discussion as if it applies. If you're trying to talk to a person and discuss their sexuality assumedly to help them, this ain't the thread.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 22, 2016, 01:21:41 am
Post by: hops on May 22, 2016, 01:55:45 am
HERE'S A PORT OF THE POTTERMORE HOGWARTS HOUSE SORTING QUIZ (http://www.gotoquiz.com/pottermore_sorting_quiz_all_possible_question)
I GOT RAVENCLAW
Post by: Tiruin on May 22, 2016, 02:13:16 am
HERE'S A PORT OF THE POTTERMORE HOGWARTS HOUSE SORTING QUIZ (http://www.gotoquiz.com/pottermore_sorting_quiz_all_possible_question)
I GOT RAVENCLAW
Quote from: Me
Pottermore Sorting Quiz (all possible questions)
Your Result: RAVENCLAW (78%)
Comparatively:
HUFFLEPUFF! (38%)
GRYFFINDOR! (24%)
SLYTHERIN! (22%)
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 22, 2016, 02:24:08 am
Quote
Your Result: RAVENCLAW (84%)
SLYTHERIN! (60%)
HUFFLEPUFF! (58%)
GRYFFINDOR! (38%)
Post by: Sirus on May 22, 2016, 02:25:52 am
Quote
Your Result: RAVENCLAW
81%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
65%
HUFFLEPUFF!
40%
SLYTHERIN!
22%
GRYFFINDOR!
Post by: hops on May 22, 2016, 02:55:35 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 22, 2016, 02:59:49 am
89%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Slytherin, the house of ambition, determination, and cunning. You are amongst other Slytherins such as: Snape, Draco, and MERLIN.
62%
RAVENCLAW
46%
GRYFFINDOR!
12%
HUFFLEPUFF!
Post by: King Kitteh on May 22, 2016, 03:08:03 am
81%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Slytherin, the house of ambition, determination, and cunning. You are amongst other Slytherins such as: Snape, Draco, and MERLIN.
57%RAVENCLAW
36%GRYFFINDOR!
34%HUFFLEPUFF!
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on May 22, 2016, 06:48:18 am
Quote
Your Result: Gryffindor
77%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Gryffindor, the house of bravery and chivalry. You are amongst other Gryffindors such as: Harry Potter, Hermione, Ron Wesley, and Neville Longbottom
Other Results:
Ravenclaw: 60%
Slytherin: 50%
Hufflepuff: 22%
Post by: Burnt Pies on May 22, 2016, 06:57:39 am
Your Result: HUFFLEPUFF!
91%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Hufflepuff, the house of loyalty, hard working, acceptance, and fairness. You are amongst other Hufflepuffs such as: Tonks and Cedric Diggory
52%RAVENCLAW
36%GRYFFINDOR!
29%SLYTHERIN!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 22, 2016, 07:08:37 am
80%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
76%HUFFLEPUFF!
46%GRYFFINDOR!
42%SLYTHERIN!
Post by: TheDarkStar on May 22, 2016, 07:39:56 am
Your Result: RAVENCLAW
86%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
50%SLYTHERIN!
41%GRYFFINDOR!
33%HUFFLEPUFF!
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 22, 2016, 08:59:08 am
Post by: Arx on May 22, 2016, 09:06:42 am
Why's Ravenclaw so popular
Because Bay12 is a massive INTJ outlier.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on May 22, 2016, 09:45:09 am
I got Gryffindor with 86%.Almost exactly my results.
Second closest was Ravenclaw with 62%.
I was expecting either Ravenclaw or Slytherin, but not Gryffindor at all.
Post by: hops on May 22, 2016, 10:03:32 am
Why's Ravenclaw so popularmajyyk + nerds
Post by: TempAcc on May 22, 2016, 10:13:49 am
82%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
56%HUFFLEPUFF!
56%GRYFFINDOR!
50%SLYTHERIN!
Gaaaay
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 22, 2016, 10:35:55 am
Why's Ravenclaw so popularBecause this is Bay12.
We have an entire thread dedicated to finding the best way to mass-produce supersoldiers by traumatizing children.
Post by: Greiger on May 22, 2016, 10:52:04 am
Of course I don't know much about any of these not being a large harry potter fan, but it's about time I posted a result of one of these tests.
Post by: Tawa on May 22, 2016, 11:15:20 am
Quote
Pottermore Sorting Quiz (all possible questions)As expected.
Your Result: RAVENCLAW
74%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
49%SLYTHERIN!
22%HUFFLEPUFF!
22%GRYFFINDOR!
Spoiler: Rant? (click to show/hide)
Post by: birdy51 on May 22, 2016, 11:21:55 am
78%
HUFFLEPUFF!
78%
RAVENCLAW!
46%
GRYFFINDOR!
32%
SLYTHERIN!
Post by: Culise on May 22, 2016, 01:34:03 pm
Slytherin: 48%
Hufflepuff: 41%
Gryffindor: 31%
I am a little surprised it's so one-sided.
Post by: TD1 on May 22, 2016, 01:50:51 pm
78%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
68%HUFFLEPUFF!
54%GRYFFINDOR!
42%SLYTHERIN!
Post by: Helgoland on May 22, 2016, 03:31:57 pm
Man, that's a nice confirmation of my self-image~
Post by: TD1 on May 22, 2016, 03:34:54 pm
Heavens help us.
Post by: Helgoland on May 22, 2016, 03:41:50 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on May 22, 2016, 04:11:23 pm
Pottermore Sorting Quiz (all possible questions) (http://www.gotoquiz.com/pottermore_sorting_quiz_all_possible_question)
Your Result: SLYTHERIN!
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Slytherin, the house of ambition, determination, and cunning. You are amongst other Slytherins such as: Snape, Draco, and MERLIN.
Result Breakdown:
66% SLYTHERIN!
64% GRYFFINDOR!
64% RAVENCLAW
46% HUFFLEPUFF!
Quiz Created on GoTo Quiz (http://www.gotoquiz.com/)
I might give the sorting hat an aneurysm trying to figure out exactly where to put me best. Almost broke even on all 3.
Post by: Criptfeind on May 22, 2016, 04:55:00 pm
80% SLYTHERIN!
74% HUFFLEPUFF!
48% GRYFFINDOR!
38% RAVENCLAW
I'm mostly evil, evil, but lame.
Post by: Helgoland on May 22, 2016, 05:45:21 pm
Post by: Criptfeind on May 22, 2016, 05:46:14 pm
Post by: Cruxador on May 22, 2016, 05:53:50 pm
Quote
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Hufflepuff (86%), the house of loyalty, hard working, acceptance, and fairness.Good ideals to have.
Why's Ravenclaw so popularNerds who over-idealize intelligence, I suppose. But knowing things is good in general, and they were my second highest rating too. If knowledge is all you've got going for you, then Ravenclaw is the only option. And if not, then it's still a fairly favored option.
Post by: Helgoland on May 22, 2016, 05:58:49 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on May 23, 2016, 01:19:34 am
80%GRYFFINDOR!
66%SLYTHERIN!
54%RAVENCLAW
40%HUFFLEPUFF!
Huh.
Post by: Cruxador on May 23, 2016, 02:06:38 am
Post by: NullForceOmega on May 23, 2016, 02:15:18 am
91% Gryffindor
53% Hufflepuff
31% Slytherin
31% Ravenclaw
Intriguing.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 23, 2016, 02:23:49 am
I was so dissatisfied with existing quizzes that I wrote one of my own (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_ethos_do_you_fit). I haven't tallied up the total weighted points but it should be reasonably balanced and I'm reasonably confident that the questions are good.Questions seem pretty solid. Probably need a few more in there to balance things out.
Quote
What ethos do you fit?Looks like the weighting's a bit fucky. Anarchist should be much lower, as with communist. Maybe democracy could go a bit higher. Monarchist, fascist, and socialist are about the right place, I think.
Your Result: Socialist 88%
70%Communist
62%Democracy
61%Anarchist
43%Monarchist
18%Fascist
Post by: hops on May 23, 2016, 02:50:19 am
Quote
What ethos do you fit?
Your Result: Socialist
89%
A middle-ground between the tumultuous inequalities of laissez-faire democracy and the gross inefficiencies and corruption of communism, a socialist system of government incentivizes good economic behavior and limits the possible harm to the weakest members of society. Allowing everyone to contribute does increase the well-being of citizens, but socialism typically taxes corporations heavily, limiting economic growth. Socialism is also economically fragile, because large numbers of unemployed persons drain money from the system faster than they add to it, and so swings of the economy can be greatly magnified. Socialism also encourages isolationism, because poor immigrants will drain the government's coffers, while emigrants will take the money invested in them by taxpayers out of the system, and pay their dividends elsewhere. Still, socialism is probably the most effective way to reach the ideal of a world where no person is forced to suffer for purely economic reasons.
87%Communist
58%Anarchist
41%Democracy
9%Monarchist
9%Fascist
I don't really have any comment since I'm not even sure what the hell my political position is, but I think there should be some distinction between "I don't trust society" and "DOWN WITH SOCIETY! BURN IT ALL, BURN IT ALL!"
Also my parents are commies so I guess I may have picked up some ideas from them.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 23, 2016, 03:02:50 am
REMOVE TREASONISTQuote9%Monarchist
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 23, 2016, 03:54:14 am
Quote
Your Result: CommunistHuh.
88%
Moral good is the same on the scale of families and neighborhoods as it is on the scale of nations. Give people what they need, and don't keep what you don't. But some people are greedy, so it's up to the government to make sure that goods and labor are distributed equitably. Communism is a noble ideal, but in practice it doesn't always work out that well. More lives have ended in the name of communism than any other ideology, and yet it has still failed in the modern world. Government planning can change priorities, so that even a small island nation like Cuba can have world-class education and medicine, but one cannot ignore Cuba's crushing poverty or harshly limited civil rights. And Cuba is one of the best off, being mostly free of corruption. A communist may talk in ideals, it's hard to ignore that those highest ideals have never really been reached.
86%Socialist
53%Anarchist
37%Democracy
17%Monarchist
8%Fascist
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 23, 2016, 05:08:23 am
Quote
What ethos do you fit?>thanks largely to the USA
Your Result: Democracy
81%
The most popular government type in the world, thanks largely to the USA. Democracy follows the ideal that every person has a say in governance, and thus the will of the majority will, over time, drift towards a government that best suits everyone's interests. Of course, it's not perfect. Inefficiencies and corruption can become common, and representatives entrenched. Tyranny of the majority can see minority groups oppressed or ethnically cleansed, voting procedures can be gamed through gerrymandering or other skullduggery, and countless tricks can be pulled to subvert the process for personal gain. On top of that, the average person just isn't that interested in voting, and those who are often understand what they're voting on only poorly. Still, it's not without reason that Democracy has been called "the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried".
65% Fascist
61% Monarchist
61% Anarchist
27% Communist
23% Socialist
Heh
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 23, 2016, 05:12:06 am
>thanks largely to the USAI lol'd
Heh
Post by: Tiruin on May 23, 2016, 05:47:23 am
Excuse my impudence on reminding a house fellow on etiquette of insight; the pursuit of wisdom should characteristically be aware of any influence affecting thought and circumstance--if largely drawn by emotion, given how intense feelings may be, there can be a tendency that whatever is in the mind shall be mostly that which is in the mind's eye. Beware.QuotePottermore Sorting Quiz (all possible questions)As expected.
Your Result: RAVENCLAW
74%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
49%SLYTHERIN!
22%HUFFLEPUFF!
22%GRYFFINDOR!Spoiler: Rant? (click to show/hide)
The Four houses of Hogwarts have not been judged due to their moral character, and should not be, as such may be likened to bias of anecdotal expectations, along with a lack of insight to what each house represents, rather than note only its characteristics. Be reminded that if you judge villainy in a canonical viewpoint, to the origins within their houses: Remember the name of Peter Pettigrew.
Never limit the scope of your ideas, lest you be stuck only with those ideas until they wear you down. Always pursue knowledge.
Post by: hops on May 23, 2016, 06:16:00 am
Slughorn.
Post by: Haspen on May 23, 2016, 06:31:18 am
Quote
Your Result: SLYTHERIN!
82%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Slytherin, the house of ambition, determination, and cunning. You are amongst other Slytherins such as: Snape, Draco, and MERLIN.
64%
HUFFLEPUFF!
48%
RAVENCLAW
46%
GRYFFINDOR!
Hiss hiss.
Quote
What ethos do you fit?
Your Result: Communist
86%
Moral good is the same on the scale of families and neighborhoods as it is on the scale of nations. Give people what they need, and don't keep what you don't. But some people are greedy, so it's up to the government to make sure that goods and labor are distributed equitably. Communism is a noble ideal, but in practice it doesn't always work out that well. More lives have ended in the name of communism than any other ideology, and yet it has still failed in the modern world. Government planning can change priorities, so that even a small island nation like Cuba can have world-class education and medicine, but one cannot ignore Cuba's crushing poverty or harshly limited civil rights. And Cuba is one of the best off, being mostly free of corruption. A communist may talk in ideals, it's hard to ignore that those highest ideals have never really been reached.
83%
Fascist
81%
Monarchist
79%
Democracy
76%
Socialist
28%
Anarchist
I AM EVERYTHING! (except disorderly)
Post by: Tiruin on May 23, 2016, 06:47:27 am
Also, since Tiruin didn't name anyone... I have a case to make for Slytherin.Oh there's a ton of examples :P I'm just under the impression that Tawa was grumpy in a :I sorta way which got him ranting about it. Though given how many examples, it's easy to miss significant individuals (ie Peter Pettigrew; Griffindor, and BLOODY TRAITOR, etc.)
Slughorn.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on May 23, 2016, 07:14:30 am
Quote
Your Result: Socialist
89%
A middle-ground between the tumultuous inequalities of laissez-faire democracy and the gross inefficiencies and corruption of communism, a socialist system of government incentivizes good economic behavior and limits the possible harm to the weakest members of society. Allowing everyone to contribute does increase the well-being of citizens, but socialism typically taxes corporations heavily, limiting economic growth. Socialism is also economically fragile, because large numbers of unemployed persons drain money from the system faster than they add to it, and so swings of the economy can be greatly magnified. Socialism also encourages isolationism, because poor immigrants will drain the government's coffers, while emigrants will take the money invested in them by taxpayers out of the system, and pay their dividends elsewhere. Still, socialism is probably the most effective way to reach the ideal of a world where no person is forced to suffer for purely economic reasons.
77%Communist
58%Anarchist
45%Democracy
9%Monarchist
0%Fascist
I'm apparently not in touch with my inner fascist, which is somewhat surprising.
However, perhaps it's just the questions.
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 23, 2016, 07:25:25 am
I think there should be some distinction between "I don't trust society" and "DOWN WITH SOCIETY! BURN IT ALL, BURN IT ALL!"
Post by: Frumple on May 23, 2016, 07:29:05 am
Quote
Pottermore Sorting Quiz (all possible questions)Mildly interesting that the pair's were both 2 points from each other...
Your Result: GRYFFINDOR!
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Gryffindor, the house of bravery and chivalry. You are amongst other Gryffindors such as: Harry Potter, Hermione, Ron Wesley, and Neville Longbottom.
Result Breakdown:
68% GRYFFINDOR!
66% HUFFLEPUFF!
54% SLYTHERIN!
52% RAVENCLAW
Quote
What ethos do you fit?Welp.
Your Result: Socialist
A middle-ground between the tumultuous inequalities of laissez-faire democracy and the gross inefficiencies and corruption of communism, a socialist system of government incentivizes good economic behavior and limits the possible harm to the weakest members of society. Allowing everyone to contribute does increase the well-being of citizens, but socialism typically taxes corporations heavily, limiting economic growth. Socialism is also economically fragile, because large numbers of unemployed persons drain money from the system faster than they add to it, and so swings of the economy can be greatly magnified. Socialism also encourages isolationism, because poor immigrants will drain the government's coffers, while emigrants will take the money invested in them by taxpayers out of the system, and pay their dividends elsewhere. Still, socialism is probably the most effective way to reach the ideal of a world where no person is forced to suffer for purely economic reasons.
Result Breakdown:
83% Socialist
64% Communist
63% Anarchist
52% Democracy
2% Monarchist
1% Fascist
Post by: TempAcc on May 23, 2016, 07:31:19 am
Quote
Your Result: DemocracySeems about right, for everyone else too. I always knew you dweebs were commies :v
81%
The most popular government type in the world, thanks largely to the USA. Democracy follows the ideal that every person has a say in governance, and thus the will of the majority will, over time, drift towards a government that best suits everyone's interests. Of course, it's not perfect. Inefficiencies and corruption can become common, and representatives entrenched. Tyranny of the majority can see minority groups oppressed or ethnically cleansed, voting procedures can be gamed through gerrymandering or other skullduggery, and countless tricks can be pulled to subvert the process for personal gain. On top of that, the average person just isn't that interested in voting, and those who are often understand what they're voting on only poorly. Still, it's not without reason that Democracy has been called "the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried".
78%Anarchist
47%Monarchist
42%Socialist
32%Fascist
18%Communist
REMOVE USSR (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAJSOJ41cFM)
Some questions are also a bit odd. Apparently not being in favor of the state in some questions makes you more fascist, even though fascism is essentially "nothing outside the state" :v
Post by: Teneb on May 23, 2016, 07:53:57 am
73% Socialist
66% Communist
48% Democracy
21% Monarchist
12% Fascist
Smash the system!
Post by: TheDarkStar on May 23, 2016, 07:57:58 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TempAcc on May 23, 2016, 08:03:15 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 23, 2016, 08:05:17 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 23, 2016, 08:44:03 am
/ \
Socialism - Fascism
Post by: Teneb on May 23, 2016, 08:46:00 am
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on May 23, 2016, 10:45:33 am
84%
A middle-ground between the tumultuous inequalities of laissez-faire democracy and the gross inefficiencies and corruption of communism, a socialist system of government incentivizes good economic behavior and limits the possible harm to the weakest members of society. Allowing everyone to contribute does increase the well-being of citizens, but socialism typically taxes corporations heavily, limiting economic growth. Socialism is also economically fragile, because large numbers of unemployed persons drain money from the system faster than they add to it, and so swings of the economy can be greatly magnified. Socialism also encourages isolationism, because poor immigrants will drain the government's coffers, while emigrants will take the money invested in them by taxpayers out of the system, and pay their dividends elsewhere. Still, socialism is probably the most effective way to reach the ideal of a world where no person is forced to suffer for purely economic reasons.
80%Anarchist
70%Communist
55%Democracy
27%Fascist
26%Monarchist
Socialist, Anarchist and Communist. Well then.
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on May 23, 2016, 10:52:19 am
Your Result: Anarchist
The state itself is an impediment – at best, a necessary one. Life is best which is externally governed least. Anarchy generally tends to not last very long, because of internal drama or external conquest. Some anarcho-syndicalist communes have been promising in the short term, but overall anarchy is not an evolutionary stable strategy. But while a pragmatist may discard it, the idealist recognizes that anarchy is the impossible ideal to which all governments ought to come as close as they can.
Result Breakdown:
78% Anarchist
72% Communist
69% Socialist
36% Democracy
18% Monarchist
15% Fascist
I... well... huh.
Post by: AzyWng on May 23, 2016, 06:25:35 pm
I'm 17, so I'm still one year from being a pedophile.
Post by: Wolfhunter107 on May 23, 2016, 06:45:14 pm
77%
The most popular government type in the world, thanks largely to the USA. Democracy follows the ideal that every person has a say in governance, and thus the will of the majority will, over time, drift towards a government that best suits everyone's interests. Of course, it's not perfect. Inefficiencies and corruption can become common, and representatives entrenched. Tyranny of the majority can see minority groups oppressed or ethnically cleansed, voting procedures can be gamed through gerrymandering or other skullduggery, and countless tricks can be pulled to subvert the process for personal gain. On top of that, the average person just isn't that interested in voting, and those who are often understand what they're voting on only poorly. Still, it's not without reason that Democracy has been called "the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried".
69%Socialist
54%Anarchist
49%Communist
36%Monarchist
24%Fascist
Post by: AzyWng on May 23, 2016, 07:46:31 pm
Your Result: Anarchist
92%
The state itself is an impediment – at best, a necessary one. Life is best which is externally governed least. Anarchy generally tends to not last very long, because of internal drama or external conquest. Some anarcho-syndicalist communes have been promising in the short term, but overall anarchy is not an evolutionary stable strategy. But while a pragmatist may discard it, the idealist recognizes that anarchy is the impossible ideal to which all governments ought to come as close as they can.
89%
Democracy
55%
Socialist
41%
Communist
27%
Monarchist
15%
Fascist
I think I just got myself on a government watchlist.
Possibly.
In any case, I don't have any explosive or demolition-related interests, so hopefully no-one's scared (although I do happen to have a curiosity with firearms)...
Also, some of the answers to some of the questions (mainly the two about criminals and those with genetic disabilities) seemed a little... loaded/inherently biased/written so that they deliberately sound unappealing?
I don't know.
Post by: Cruxador on May 23, 2016, 08:06:42 pm
Looks like the weighting's a bit fucky. Anarchist should be much lower, as with communist. Maybe democracy could go a bit higher. Monarchist, fascist, and socialist are about the right place, I think.Honestly if the top one's good and the rest are reasonable ballparks, I think it's satisfactory to me.
I'm apparently not in touch with my inner fascist, which is somewhat surprising.Perhaps. Why did you expect to be fascist?
However, perhaps it's just the questions.
Some questions are also a bit odd. Apparently not being in favor of the state in some questions makes you more fascist, even though fascism is essentially "nothing outside the state" :vI think that's a simplistic view of it, but what questions are you thinking of?
...interesting. I'm not sure how communism and socialism rank so close to anarchism for me.Anarchism includes the possibilities like anarcho-sindicalism, and AnComism is as much about anarchy as communism. A lot of choices are weighted to account for those viewpoints. Considering it's third on your list, it may well be that high mostly because of overlap.
Post by: heydude6 on May 23, 2016, 08:23:59 pm
Quote
What ethos do you fit?
Your Result: Anarchist
86%
The state itself is an impediment – at best, a necessary one. Life is best which is externally governed least. Anarchy generally tends to not last very long, because of internal drama or external conquest. Some anarcho-syndicalist communes have been promising in the short term, but overall anarchy is not an evolutionary stable strategy. But while a pragmatist may discard it, the idealist recognizes that anarchy is the impossible ideal to which all governments ought to come as close as they can.
81%
Socialist
80%
Communist
54%
Democracy
22%
Monarchist
11%
Fascist
Welp, this is me. I personally don't think this is correct because I don't believe an anarchistic society can properly function. There are too many institutions that rely on authority to make anarchism work. I live in an apartment building for goodness sake, how is anarchy supposed to support that?
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 23, 2016, 08:51:24 pm
I live in an apartment building for goodness sake, how is anarchy supposed to support that?L O V E A N D C O M M U N I T Y
Post by: NullForceOmega on May 23, 2016, 08:56:17 pm
Not joke: Anarchy is transitional, it is not possible to sustain, eventually some form of hierarchy comes into being.
Post by: Rolan7 on May 23, 2016, 09:14:17 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Strong emphasis on Introvert, though that's really situational, and pretty marginal on the others (possibly due to alcohol).
Maybe I'll try again later.
And maybe I'll check out these other tests that people are apparently taking now :P
I never read Hufflepuff Adventures but I know enough about wizards and Slytherins to take the test probably. (I'm guessing Slytherin)
The ethos test sounds cool too.
Post by: Criptfeind on May 23, 2016, 09:27:42 pm
62%Communist
47%Democracy
42%Anarchist
24%Monarchist
3%Fascist
Shocking no one I fall on what's probably average for this forum. I feel like I had a lot of issues with a lot of the questions. Like...
#6: Do you mean by ability or some inherent worth of their person?
#9: Um. Nether. I think whatever applies my morals to society is correct. In a soceity that doesn't follow my morals, Revolutionary is correct, in a society that does follow my morals traditionalism is correct.
#12: I think I answered this one wrong, although it probably gave me the right score anyway. A very broad question ether way.
#14: Although I'm not firm on my position here, something I see people say they want is often a middle ground between the first two options. In that people can own a limited amount. I feel like perhaps that should've been in there in some way.
#15: I feel like some of the answers, or even all of them, should be able to be used together
#16: No issue with the question. But the first answer is funny. Lol.
#17: I feel like this question doesn't even make sense. What even is a truly free market? Edit: To me that seems like it'd be only possible in some post apoclyptic hellscape where the only law is that the strong take from the weak in some mad maxesk setting. But I'm not sure if that's what the question actually means.
#18: I feel like these are not totally mutually exclusive. Strive for your best but have some realism
#19: Er. Well, I'll avoid thoughts on this too much, but I think perhaps more choices are needed.
Post by: NullForceOmega on May 23, 2016, 09:35:43 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 23, 2016, 09:40:53 pm
Post by: Cruxador on May 24, 2016, 12:12:23 am
how is anarchy supposed to support that?Anarchy as a political doctrine isn't just random chaos, you know. Private citizens and worker's syndicates are perfectly able to engage in construction projects, provide maintenance, and engage in economic transactions.
I KNOW that most of my answers were authoritarian, and the rest very centrist, so I should definitely not be heavily skewed to anarchy and communism.Well, I didn't necessarily orient around those paradigms, but that's still odd. Unfortunately I can't really access any data from responses or get in and check things to make sure everything's working right. I did go through and test it and found that I was easily able to get strongly monarchist/fascist results when trying to, so it's not like the thing is bugging out. It may be an issue of specific questions.
#6: Do you mean by ability or some inherent worth of their person?It was designed with the intent that people bring their own meaning there, and many folks consider the two to be pretty well entwined.
Quote
#9: Um. Nether. I think whatever applies my morals to society is correct. In a soceity that doesn't follow my morals, Revolutionary is correct, in a society that does follow my morals traditionalism is correct.Obviously, you prefer your own morals. The question intentionally doesn't deal with that, because it's not what the question is asking.
Quote
#12: I think I answered this one wrong, although it probably gave me the right score anyway. A very broad question ether way.Broad is fine. There is no wrong answer.
Quote
#14: Although I'm not firm on my position here, something I see people say they want is often a middle ground between the first two options. In that people can own a limited amount. I feel like perhaps that should've been in there in some way.Well, the last option is actually a middle ground between the two, though perhaps not of the sort you're talking about.
Quote
#15: I feel like some of the answers, or even all of them, should be able to be used togetherYeah, this is the question to which the second sentence of the second paragraph up top most directly applies.
Quote
#16: No issue with the question. But the first answer is funny. Lol.It's a long enough quiz, gotta have some levity where it can fit nicely.
Quote
#17: I feel like this question doesn't even make sense. What even is a truly free market? Edit: To me that seems like it'd be only possible in some post apoclyptic hellscape where the only law is that the strong take from the weak in some mad maxesk setting. But I'm not sure if that's what the question actually means.You've more or less got it. It's just a "more regulation" vs "less regulation" question, really.
Quote
#18: I feel like these are not totally mutually exclusive. Strive for your best but have some realismYeah, they're not mutually exclusive at all. It's just a matter of which one is the highest priority.
Quote
#19: Er. Well, I'll avoid thoughts on this too much, but I think perhaps more choices are needed.Yeah, I suppose it's sort of a false choice these days, now that we can just subsidize sperm or egg picking. I'm not sure there's much more nuance besides that though, which isn't just "I want that choice but not all the way", which isn't useful for the purposes of the quiz.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 24, 2016, 12:43:58 am
Anarchy as a political doctrine isn't just random chaos, you know. Private citizens and worker's syndicates are perfectly able to engage in construction projects, provide maintenance, and engage in economic transactions.I think I worked out why the test is biased towards anarchism
Post by: Cruxador on May 24, 2016, 01:10:18 am
Because I think it's a system capable of supporting the very basics of society? That's not exactly much of a basis in its favor. It's still an ideal that has never been successful on any appreciable scale for a substantial period of time and is demonstrably not an evolutionary stable strategy.Anarchy as a political doctrine isn't just random chaos, you know. Private citizens and worker's syndicates are perfectly able to engage in construction projects, provide maintenance, and engage in economic transactions.I think I worked out why the test is biased towards anarchism
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 24, 2016, 01:11:29 am
Because I think it's a system capable of supporting the very basics of society?I think you're being a bit too generous there
Post by: King Kitteh on May 24, 2016, 01:41:40 am
Quote
What ethos do you fit?
Your Result: Fascist
77%
The good of the state comes first, and the good of the people necessarily follows. Fascism hybridizes the glory and effective central planning of monarchy with democratic elements, allowing a leader to be chosen based on merit, but giving that leader the power necessary to do things efficiently and in great magnitude without consulting the will of the people. Fascism is looked down upon in the modern zeitgeist because it has historically tended to be ruthless in its efficiency, purging ethnic groups and committing moral atrocities for the good of the nation or its people. But if you don't mind getting your hands dirty, and don't mind limited civil rights for the good of the nation, fascism can be incredibly efficient.
62%Monarchist
44%Democracy
25%Communist
20%Socialist
13%Anarchist
Am I a bad person?
Edit: Should note that I wrote this from what I would want as the leader of a society, not one of the mindless masses.
Post by: Cruxador on May 24, 2016, 01:49:56 am
It has successfully functioned in real life, you know. Just never for very long.Because I think it's a system capable of supporting the very basics of society?I think you're being a bit too generous there
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 24, 2016, 01:54:03 am
It has successfully functioned in real life, you know. Just never for very long.Sort of undermines the "successful" bit, huh
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on May 24, 2016, 04:58:20 pm
88%
Congratulations! You have been sorted into Ravenclaw, the house of intelligence, curiosity, individualism, and wit. You are amongst other Ravenclaws, such as: Cho Chang, and Luna Lovegood.
50%SLYTHERIN!
48%GRYFFINDOR!
24%HUFFLEPUFF!
======
I've always heard of Slytherin as the epitome of evil, of nasty and greed and backstabbing. But it's really not. In its prime, "cunning, ambition, and determination" were the things. I guess that a. it was a bit closer to evil than most, or more easily swayed, and b. nobody can handle a story without a clear bad guy
======
Your Result: Communist
86%
Moral good is the same on the scale of families and neighborhoods as it is on the scale of nations. Give people what they need, and don't keep what you don't. But some people are greedy, so it's up to the government to make sure that goods and labor are distributed equitably. Communism is a noble ideal, but in practice it doesn't always work out that well. More lives have ended in the name of communism than any other ideology, and yet it has still failed in the modern world. Government planning can change priorities, so that even a small island nation like Cuba can have world-class education and medicine, but one cannot ignore Cuba's crushing poverty or harshly limited civil rights. And Cuba is one of the best off, being mostly free of corruption. A communist may talk in ideals, it's hard to ignore that those highest ideals have never really been reached.
85%Socialist
43%Anarchist
24%Democracy
17%Monarchist
11%Fascist
=======
Circus yes, I'm definitely a communist. Love it when my political leanings are confirmed.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 24, 2016, 06:47:19 pm
Am I a bad person?Literally Hitler
Edit: Should note that I wrote this from what I would want as the leader of a society, not one of the mindless masses.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 24, 2016, 09:21:39 pm
What about nuns?It has successfully functioned in real life, you know. Just never for very long.Because I think it's a system capable of supporting the very basics of society?I think you're being a bit too generous there
Post by: Culise on May 24, 2016, 10:37:36 pm
While I'm not too familiar with Christian monasticism either in general or of nunneries or abbeys in particular, aren't terms like "Mother Superior" and "abbess" extant for a reason?What about nuns?It has successfully functioned in real life, you know. Just never for very long.Because I think it's a system capable of supporting the very basics of society?I think you're being a bit too generous there
Post by: King Kitteh on May 25, 2016, 05:26:55 am
Am I a bad person?Literally Hitler
Edit: Should note that I wrote this from what I would want as the leader of a society, not one of the mindless masses.
I am LITERALLY Hitler? I don't think that word means, what you think it means.
Post by: Orange Wizard on May 25, 2016, 05:34:43 am
I am LITERALLY Hitler? I don't think that word means, what you think it means.L I T E R A L L Y G O E B B E L S
Post by: Teneb on May 25, 2016, 05:51:25 am
You are literally Adolf Hilter, having spent some time in suspended animation after your body double committed suicide in 1945.I am LITERALLY Hitler? I don't think that word means, what you think it means.Am I a bad person?Literally Hitler
Edit: Should note that I wrote this from what I would want as the leader of a society, not one of the mindless masses.
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 25, 2016, 06:47:11 am
Am I a bad person?No, you are a nerd who likes strategy games and micromanagement but hates losing.
Just like Hitler.
Post by: King Kitteh on May 25, 2016, 07:31:53 am
I also exhibit Nazi-ish tendencies. Yesterday at school we had to vote on some pictures of nature taken by photography students.
I really liked one but voted for someone else because they used the word "effect" instead of "affect".
Truly dear photographer, climate change has affected your brain more than it could ever do to that glacier.
Post by: SirQuiamus on May 25, 2016, 08:44:05 am
I really liked one but voted for someone else because they used the word "effect" instead of "affect".Holy shit, dude, that's evil.
I can sympathize with regular Third-Reich Nazis and their honest Holocaust enthusiasm, but God damn, Grammar-Nazis are utterly inhumane monsters with no redeeming qualities whatsoever!
Post by: King Kitteh on May 25, 2016, 09:01:11 am
Holy shit, dude, that's evil.
I can sympathize with regular Third-Reich Nazis and their honest Holocaust enthusiasm, but God damn, Grammar-Nazis are utterly inhumane monsters with no redeeming qualities whatsoever!
Well I AM Australian, so I guess at a stretch I have a heritage in genocide. Also I think I had great aunt who was German, and she probably made a holocaust joke at one point, so yep.
Pretty much as Third-Reich as you can get.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 25, 2016, 09:04:43 am
Yes, they are extant, for determining who does what.While I'm not too familiar with Christian monasticism either in general or of nunneries or abbeys in particular, aren't terms like "Mother Superior" and "abbess" extant for a reason?What about nuns?It has successfully functioned in real life, you know. Just never for very long.Because I think it's a system capable of supporting the very basics of society?I think you're being a bit too generous there
Post by: Sinistar on May 25, 2016, 03:12:15 pm
Spoiler: I KNEW IT (click to show/hide)
But seriously. Interesting quiz, but I too am finding some questions which I find hard to answer either because it feels like it lacks another option and/or it feels like I should combine the answers given the situation... Might try it later. But of course I'm not taking the test just because we all know I am afraid of secretly being Il Duce.
Also, can't decide if ethos descriptions are a bit tongue-in-cheeck, slihtly based or maybe something else is going on. "Thanks largely to USA", "rampart corruption of communism vs. no corruption in fascism no sir" and "anarchy being theoretically perfect while communism theoretically being not perfect" makes me sad sad Popo. But don't mind me, just thinking aloud. :P
Also also, now I wonder how much human life loss could one really attribute to Communism and it's off-shots...
Post by: Furtuka on May 25, 2016, 04:14:54 pm
Post by: Tawa on May 25, 2016, 04:18:47 pm
Post by: Cruxador on May 25, 2016, 05:25:13 pm
That was LSP, I think.As far as I'm aware, the origin is actually this post (https://www.reddit.com/comments/dlu96/new_si_unit_one_hitler/). It's the earliest dated, and because of some formatting details that seem to generally be lost elsewhere, I suspect it to be legitimate. It then was reposted to 4chan and spread from there, in a directly opposite turn of events from the usual stereotype. Of course, one of the places it spread to was reddit; in true redditor form they ripped off the concept from 4chan rather than from themselves even though it was on reddit first.
Side note: I googled for a conversion and look what happened (http://i.imgur.com/HQ3JdBH.png).
I am LITERALLY Hitler? I don't think that word means, what you think it means.I don't think a comma means what you think it means.
Post by: Cthulhu on May 25, 2016, 06:09:49 pm
I was so dissatisfied with existing quizzes that I wrote one of my own (http://www.gotoquiz.com/what_ethos_do_you_fit). I haven't tallied up the total weighted points but it should be reasonably balanced and I'm reasonably confident that the questions are good.
Anarchist 93
Democracy 69
Monarchist 43
Fascist 42
Communist 4
Socialist 4
I would not consider myself an anarchist at all.
I still feel like there's a lot of loaded questions in here, though I don't know how possible it is for a quiz like this not to be loaded. Like the political compass quiz, the wording here strikes me as negatively positioning viewpoints that aren't left-libertarian.
If you don't think your country has an obligation to "educate" groups causing "Internal turmoil and economic drain" you're Hitler. I'm guessing you intended "eliminate" to be neutral but it doesn't come off that way. A free market is good or bad, no nuance. Difference is positioned only as a better than worse than dichotomy, or the nebulous "Inequality" which likewise is a negative positioning. Is it not okay for cultures to be different in a non-valuated way? If I'm reading your question, I have three options: People are the same. Some people are better than others. People are the same, but external factors cause inequality.
Rehabilitate prisoners or kill them. Etc.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on May 25, 2016, 06:21:26 pm
Sorry, this one just bugged me a bit.
Post by: Cthulhu on May 25, 2016, 06:32:55 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 27, 2016, 01:21:10 pm
I don't know whether I should be honoured or offended at your comment. All I know is that it's disturbingly accurate.Oh shit, literally Hitler
I also exhibit Nazi-ish tendencies. Yesterday at school we had to vote on some pictures of nature taken by photography students.
I really liked one but voted for someone else because they used the word "effect" instead of "affect".
Truly dear photographer, climate change has affected your brain more than it could ever do to that glacier.
Adolf m8, I have to warn you not to invade the Poles b4 u WWII everything
Post by: wobbly on May 27, 2016, 01:44:34 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AzyWng on May 31, 2016, 02:42:52 pm
I don't know whether I should be honoured or offended at your comment. All I know is that it's disturbingly accurate.Oh shit, literally Hitler
I also exhibit Nazi-ish tendencies. Yesterday at school we had to vote on some pictures of nature taken by photography students.
I really liked one but voted for someone else because they used the word "effect" instead of "affect".
Truly dear photographer, climate change has affected your brain more than it could ever do to that glacier.
Adolf m8, I have to warn you not to invade the Poles b4 u WWII everything
This feels relevant somehow. World wars and the like. (http://xkcd.com/1687/)
Post by: MaximumZero on June 02, 2016, 12:07:09 am
Your Result: 88% Socialist
83% Communist
53% Anarchist
30% Democracy
10% Monarchist
6% Fascist
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 25, 2016, 12:07:23 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hello citizen, and welcome back, to the Shit Let's Be Demographic Information Thread. After a long period of hiatus, and many recent incidents throughout the Lower Forum, the Great Toad has reallocated funding to the SLBDIT for the collective benefit of Bay 12. Please participate in the following poll and record your results above to celebrate the third grand reopening of the thread.
General Conspiracist Belief Scale (http://personality-testing.info/tests/GCBS/)
Results
Government Malfeasance: 3/5
Global Conspiracies: 1.33/5
Information Control: 3.33/5
Extraterrestrial Coverup: 1/5
Personal Wellbeing: 1.33/5
Average Anticitizenry: 2/5
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 25, 2016, 12:19:27 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 25, 2016, 12:27:26 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 25, 2016, 12:56:54 am
Quote
Government malfeasance: this facet reflects a belief that the government commits crimes on its own citizens. Your score was 2/5.
Extraterrestrial cover-up: this facet reflects a belief that information about aliens is being concealed from the public. Your score was 1/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: this facet reflects a belief that governments and industry are controlled behind the scenes. Your score was 2/5.
Personal well-being: this facet reflects a belief that individuals are currently being harmed by concealed dangers. Your score was 2.67/5.
Control of information: this facet reflects a belief that science is manipulated. Your score was 4/5.
Your overall score for conspiracist beliefs was 2.33/5.
...
That thing is so broad it's completely useless. Like, seriously, that's not even.We're taking online personality tests. Of course it's not useful.
Post by: Culise on July 25, 2016, 12:59:27 am
Quote
Government Malfeasance: 2/5It actually makes me slightly worried that I'm below average for my demographic.
Global Conspiracies: 1/5
Information Control: 1.67/5
Extraterrestrial Coverup: 1/5
Personal Wellbeing: 1/5
Average Anticitizenry: 1.33/5
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 25, 2016, 01:04:18 am
Post by: Baffler on July 25, 2016, 01:16:15 am
Quote
Government malfeasance: this facet reflects a belief that the government commits crimes on its own citizens. Your score was 4/5.
Extraterrestrial cover-up: this facet reflects a belief that information about aliens is being concealed from the public. Your score was 1/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: this facet reflects a belief that governments and industry are controlled behind the scenes. Your score was 2.33/5.
Personal well-being: this facet reflects a belief that individuals are currently being harmed by concealed dangers. Your score was 2/5.
Control of information: this facet reflects a belief that science is manipulated. Your score was 4.67/5.
Average: 2.8/5
*Adjusts tinfoil hat*
Post by: Frumple on July 25, 2016, 01:28:24 am
Post by: Pwnzerfaust on July 25, 2016, 02:55:34 am
Government Malfeasance: 2/5
Global Conspiracies: 1/5
Information Control: 2/5
Extraterrestrial Coverup: 1/5
Personal Wellbeing: 1/5
Overall Score: 1.4/5
Yeah I guess I don't really pay much mind to conspiracy theories.
Post by: AzyWng on July 25, 2016, 08:30:29 am
Extraterrestrial cover-up: 2/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: 2/5.
Personal well-being: 1.33/5.
Control of information: 3.33/5.
Your overall score for conspiracist beliefs was 2.13/5. The average score of college students is 2.22 (Brotherton, 2013).
I think the government is a bunch of assholes who have the misfortune of running our country because 1) All those fit for the job can't or won't take it and 2) Human nature makes having no leader a distinct not possibility, but I'm still naive enough to believe the people/public wouldn't be fooled by these folks over things this big.
Post by: Wimopy on July 25, 2016, 08:34:13 am
Malevolent Global Conspiracies: 1.33/5
Control of Information: 4.67/5
Extraterrestrial Coverup: 1/5
Personal Wellbeing: 1.33/5
Overall: 2.47/5
Not sure why I'm above average. I don't believe in conspiracy theories. The only thing I believe in is people possibly harming or withholding information from others if they stand to profit from it. I'm not saying murder (at least not in general), I'm saying not telling about some negative effects. At least not in an obvious way.
Also, I don't say that it's impossible that some politicians may stage minor events that serve their agendas. Not necessarily in the most democratic countries, of course.
Aaand.... let's face it. Setting up guerilla/terrorist squads in an enemy country is definitely a valid tactic. No idea how this coincides with 'harming own citizens'...
Post by: mainiac on July 25, 2016, 08:43:12 am
Global Conspiracies: 1/5
Information Control: 1/5
Extraterrestrial Coverup: 1/5
Personal Wellbeing: 1/5
That thing is so broad it's completely useless. Like, seriously, that's not even.
It's very subjective. It's probably a better insight into how you read the questions then anything. Which is probably just a plot by them to make sure you dont see that it all goes to the very top. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE4r5Szpk-M)
Post by: Criptfeind on July 25, 2016, 08:53:40 am
Global Conspiracies: 1.33/5
Information Control: 4/5
Extraterrestrial Coverup: 1/5
Personal Wellbeing: 1/5
I could probably get 1s across the board, or even higher numbers in some places I guess depending on how I interpret it. I think the issue is the word secret. Since many of these things are done, just not... You know. Secretly. It's not a secret that police (Part of the government) are murdering innocent civilians. It's not a secret that with enough money you can hire scientists to say whatever you want. It's not a secret that new technology is fought against by the people who profit off the old way and don't want to adapt. And... Those are the answers more or less that gave me this score. Is it a conspiracy if it's just... A fact of life out in the open? Perhaps I should have heavily disagreed with the questions based on the fact that they are not secret. Ah well.
I am interested in the people that got more then 1 in the Extraterrestrial place, honestly I could see anyone getting any score in any other category, but the aliumz one seems pretty blatant.
Post by: Itnetlolor on July 25, 2016, 08:59:38 am
Government malfeasance: 4.33/5 this facet reflects a belief that the government commits crimes on its own citizens.
Extraterrestrial cover-up: 4.33/5 this facet reflects a belief that information about aliens is being concealed from the public.
Malevolent global conspiracies: 4.33/5 this facet reflects a belief that governments and industry are controlled behind the scenes.
Personal well-being: 4.67/5 this facet reflects a belief that individuals are currently being harmed by concealed dangers.
Control of information: 4/5 this facet reflects a belief that science is manipulated.
Your overall score for conspiracist beliefs was 4.33/5.
The average score of college students is 2.22
Maybe if the government hadn't acted so shady all the time, things would be different. Plus, it probably doesn't help that I've witnessed a couple UFOs in my lifetime, childhood and adulthood alike, and no explanations and being labeled crazy because of it too (since childhood, that is). Heck, even my out-of-the-box thinking (*cough*critical thinking skills/imagination/being nice*cough*) was more-or-less discouraged at every corner from other kids to teachers alike, as if I were alien myself, so to speak. Not to mention belief in anything spiritual that science would have a hard time explaining, but faith would otherwise (like supernatural healing abilities, perception, and such) being immediately dismissed because "it doesn't make sense", but never any alternatives being given, nor open-mindedness to the alternatives via faith and such (if anything, I hear proud faith-bashing without shame anytime I mention such things, even if someone got the shit scared out of them by a ghost they "don't believe in").
Shit's happening, like a different kind of holy war or something, and something's gotta give somewhere down the line. I'm playing it safe and keeping my faith, just in case, let's say, what if a giant eye appears out of nowhere or something, and humanity gets called out on it's shit or something (Revelations is always kept in mind. Consider it destined to happen; scientifically to start, then followed up with the supernatural to catch everyone off-guard).
For what it's worth, it can at least explain why I made an easy target for bullying and the like since childhood as well, even when I was wise enough to keep my mouth shut. Believe in God, and you're nobody's friend. I mean, they can say they're your friend, but they'll definitely not back it up in any way when you would truly need one. I lost count how much I got my ass kicked, and nobody protected me when they promised they would. Some friends they were.
EDIT:
/me Catches and cleans up as much confetti as he can get his hands on to craft a few glitter bombs.
Just in case... You know, I'm not the only delusional lunatic that somehow still believes he's sane.
EDIT EDIT:
I guess I can also attribute most of my rating to the fact that I'm a social pessimist, and generally assume even some of the kinder of folks have hidden malevolent agendas or something (Summary: Anyone and everyone is likely a dick, no exceptions; no offense). Being a target, since childhood, for unnecessary bullcrap can really change one's perspective for the worse.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 25, 2016, 09:03:44 am
/me rains from the ceiling, polluting your chakras with daemons of capitalist excess and closing your mind's eye.
(Half credit to maniac for being the first glassy-eyed sheeple slave)
Post by: mainiac on July 25, 2016, 09:08:55 am
Post by: TempAcc on July 25, 2016, 09:54:17 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
>:V SZIENCE, HOW COLD YE
:P it prob got so high because I don't exactly trust the pharmaceutical industry and the guvmint too much, though most of the sentiment is based off verified fact.
Post by: Arx on July 25, 2016, 11:22:30 am
Probably because I answered with my country in mind and there have been quite a lot of highly shady deals cut here. And do you say a yes or no to a small group secretly controlling the government if it's not a secret?
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 25, 2016, 11:28:08 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Government malfeasance: This facet reflects a belief that the government commits crimes on its own citizens. Your score was 4.67/5
This one's factually correct for most nations with security threats coming from its own citizens, for most nations with cold war legacies and most nations with advanced state security bureaus. Not really much you can do about it when conspiracy theories like mass surveillance get confirmed as completely true xD
Malevolent global conspiracies: This facet reflects a belief that governments and industry are controlled behind the scenes. Your score was 5/5.
They aren't controlled in public :P
Between lobby groups, advisory groups, consultancies, think tanks, transnational corporations, internationalist clubs and networks, lots of ways to gain relevance above a head of state - that's without even beginning to touch on supranational entities like the IMF or European Union. Most of the times it's just the way things are done, so as to avoid public outrage and opposition to unpopular policy. Few people for example want fracking done besides their home lol
Control of information: this facet reflects a belief that science is manipulated. Your score was 3.67/5.
Yeah another one where it is just factually correct to say this is true. People manipulate results in order to further their personal career, doesn't mean they successfully get past peer review - but you do get things in trials where results were manipulated in order to justify research costs ;]
That's just fraud on the small scale, but on the national one, when the stakes are big people are enticed to abuse. Anti-global warming science that is funded by oil companies are an obvious case, there was an amusing historical one where one scientist tried to defeat the sleuth of science funded by can manufacturers that said lead cans had no health effect on people (despite all evidence to the contrary), GMO is our modern day punching bag, smoking was (I guess still is) one such ground, and I laughed my arse off when I read a scientific paper concluding the health effects of regular cocoa consumption, as funded by Nestle (a major producer of chocolate).
Extraterrestrial cover-up: this facet reflects a belief that information about aliens is being concealed from the public. Your score was 1/5.
Of the legit coverups, governments covering up experimental missiles and aircraft is more likely. Unless aliens is referring to illegal migrants lol
Personal well-being: This facet reflects a belief that individuals are currently being harmed by concealed dangers. Your score was 2.33/5.
I'm quite disappointed they didn't have questions regarding the usual classics, like lead, fluoridated water, xenoestrogens, pollutants, quite recently in Colorado USA they even had weed in their water. (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/a-colorado-town-tests-positive-for-marijuana-in-its-water.html?_r=0) Hilarious!
As it stands the only one of these questions I really rated highly was the question on mysterious groups whose agenda involves the spreading of disease. Having seen the ebola death cults, it's safe to say the earth is worsened by their nurgletic touch, and I dare not cross their potent path before their shelf life perishes. Even afterwards, I shall avoid their corpses like the plague, for it may very well be! XD
I have a 4/5 on government witchcraft and twos on the rest.I'd say open secret still counts, since they're not trying to be transparent
Probably because I answered with my country in mind and there have been quite a lot of highly shady deals cut here. And do you say a yes or no to a small group secretly controlling the government if it's not a secret?
Post by: TheDarkStar on July 25, 2016, 01:54:47 pm
Extraterrestrial cover-up: It's pretty obvious that this is not happening. 1/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: Probably not a thing, because otherwise governments would be more organized/stable. 1/5.
Personal well-being: See NSA surveillance. But overall, there isn't a lot of evidence for this. 2/5.
Control of information: There are some things where this is perfectly fine - nuclear weapons development, etc. However, between biased scientists and attention-grabbing media networks, there are some fields where knowledge is significantly (often accidentally! or done for fame/attention by unscrupulous scientists) misreported. 3.67/5.
"Your overall score for conspiracist beliefs was 1.93/5. The average score of college students is 2.22 (Brotherton, 2013)."
Edit: I find it odd that I agree with basically all of LW's points but my score is a lot lower.
Post by: Solifuge on July 26, 2016, 12:42:33 am
I stole MSH's pretty color scheme:
Quote
Government malfeasance: 1/5
Extraterrestrial cover-up: 1/5
Malevolent global conspiracies: 1/5
Personal well-being: 1/5
Control of information: 3.67/5
Your overall score for conspiracist beliefs was 1.53/5. The average score of college students is 2.22
There were some loosely-worded bits in Control of Information; though they help new stuff too, subsidies and tax breaks can incentivize older and more-established technology rather than new ones, and the way research institutions are set up tends to encourage publishing single instances of positive results in a sea of unpublished negatives or inconclusives, which I considered "research and technology is being suppressed."
Post by: A Thing on July 26, 2016, 01:33:15 am
Malevolent Global Conspiracies 1 I wouldn't doubt there are some global shenanigans going on, but all the questions seemed to point more toward Illuminati type stuff which is a bit silly.
Control of Information 3.33 The mega-corps are out to get us! Put your science machines away lest they take you very life!
Extraterrestrial cover-up 1. I mean, I won't deny the existence of aliens because they'll fuck me up if they do show up. For now, however, I don't think they are mucking about.
Personal well-being 1.33 Again, not sure what I picked for this and I don't really care either.
Overall score: 1.87
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 26, 2016, 01:48:03 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 26, 2016, 01:51:36 am
Post by: Flying Dice on July 26, 2016, 01:58:36 am
Extraterrestrial cover-up: this facet reflects a belief that information about aliens is being concealed from the public. Your score was 1/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: this facet reflects a belief that governments and industry are controlled behind the scenes. Your score was 3.33/5.
Personal well-being: this facet reflects a belief that individuals are currently being harmed by concealed dangers. Your score was 2.67/5.
Control of information: this facet reflects a belief that science is manipulated. Your score was 4.33/5.
Of course, their design doesn't really leave much room for nuance in regard to the scale, intensity, or nature of the various questions they ask. Take the bits about manipulation of scientific knowledge--provably true in the cases of things like the damage caused by smoking, levels of radiation people were exposed to in Cold War era nuclear tests, degree-holding climate change deniers on the bankroll of energy corporations, &c. But with this methodology that awareness is indistinguishable from someone who thinks that climate change is a hoax, the moon landing was faked, archaeological evidence of early human life is an atheist/Satanist conspiracy, &c.
I just went with mildly agree whenever I could think of a reasonably realistic example or two of the subject--if I'd disagreed with anything that didn't have constantly repeated incidents it would have been slanted just as far the other way. It's a shame, this could actually have produced interesting results if it were better designed. At best they're going to maybe be able to infer something about positive/negative outlook by demographic, if anyone actually gives them extra information.
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 26, 2016, 02:24:53 am
...
Might wanna get your eyes checked.Someone messed it up
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 26, 2016, 02:26:03 am
It was off by two the second you posted that.Might wanna get your eyes checked.Someone messed it up
Sir, I'm going to need you to stop causing a public disturbance.
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 26, 2016, 02:28:03 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 26, 2016, 02:31:15 am
Nobody is covering up anything sir, please, you're scaring the children. Look at the terror in little Flying Dice's eyes.
Post by: Kot on July 26, 2016, 04:11:20 am
2.87/5
Huh.
Government malfeasance: this facet reflects a belief that the government commits crimes on its own citizens. Your score was 4/5.
Extraterrestrial cover-up: this facet reflects a belief that information about aliens is being concealed from the public. Your score was 1.67/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: this facet reflects a belief that governments and industry are controlled behind the scenes. Your score was 2.33/5.
Personal well-being: this facet reflects a belief that individuals are currently being harmed by concealed dangers. Your score was 2.33/5.
Control of information: this facet reflects a belief that science is manipulated. Your score was 4/5.
I am pretty sure They are after me now. I need my tinfoil hat, quick!
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 26, 2016, 04:34:01 am
Edit: I find it odd that I agree with basically all of LW's points but my score is a lot lower.Maybe you didn't slam down your answers with the righteous fury of a thousand suns on the most extreme scale to the utmost extent in order to make sure they don't know that you know what they know. Which is good, because if they knew you knew, you'd know they know already.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 26, 2016, 04:41:34 am
/me by your multiple pronoun usage, MetalSlimeHunt accidentally marks himself as the target for the dissident erasure squad.Edit: I find it odd that I agree with basically all of LW's points but my score is a lot lower.Maybe you didn't slam down your answers with the righteous fury of a thousand suns on the most extreme scale to the utmost extent in order to make sure they don't know that you know what they know. Which is good, because if they knew you knew, you'd know they know already.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 26, 2016, 04:46:59 am
avoid dissident erasure squad conspiracies WHICH DON'T EXIST
Post by: TD1 on July 26, 2016, 02:23:34 pm
Extraterrestrial cover-up: Your score was 1/5.
Malevolent global conspiracies: Your score was 1/5.
Personal well-being: Your score was 1/5.
Control of information: Your score was 4.33/5.
Your overall score for conspiracist beliefs was 1.87/5. The average score of college students is 2.22
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on July 28, 2016, 12:07:17 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Behold fate, inescapable, inscrutable, inevitable. (https://freetrumpscore.com/)
590
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 28, 2016, 12:13:15 am
Projected fate: MEAT PROCESSOR AT TRUMP STEAKS
Post by: Tiruin on July 28, 2016, 01:24:34 am
Behold fate, inescapable, inscrutable, inevitable. (https://freetrumpscore.com/)These tests @_@ whaaah.590
Quote
What Does Donald Trump Think of You?And I wrote everything down to the last detail, even my hand size (tiny! :D)
Get your personalized Free Trump Score™
Quote
349 - YOU ARE THE WORST PERSONWell ._. uh, at least we don't share the same thoughts of each other?
Projected fate: DEPORTED
E: I wonder how I got 'deported' if I put in 'Asian/Outside America'. XD
Post by: misko27 on July 28, 2016, 01:36:04 am
Projected fate: WALL CONSTRUCTION DUTY
ok then.
Post by: Kot on July 28, 2016, 02:07:26 am
Projected fate: RIOT GUARD, ARMY OF TRUMP(TM)
Shiiit, I'm moving to America then.
Post by: Erkki on July 28, 2016, 03:07:42 am
Projected fate: Meat processor at Trump Steaks
I did Crusador's text:
80% Socialist
76% Communist
63% Anarchist
54% Democracy
39% Monarchist
36% Fascist
This is an interesting result, because I consider myself somewhat of an antianarchist and am not a communist. I guess for Americans, supporting minimum wage and other mechanisms to keeping the poorest fed could be communism. :)
The original personality test score turned out to be INTJ: Introvert(9%) iNtuitive(25%) Thinking(19%) Judging(9%) which I'm not sure what its worth.
Post by: Criptfeind on July 28, 2016, 03:12:00 am
Projected fate: A STAY IN TRUMP RESORT GUANTANAMO BAY
Lol
Post by: Wimopy on July 28, 2016, 04:53:50 am
Projected fate: FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO TRUMP MAGAZINE
Well... I answered that I have low income, since I'm a student. If you consider family as well and the average that graduates make after uni, I'd probably be medium or high...
Then again, I also said I'm Christian, since I've been baptized so that's what would show up on Government papers.
And between Hillary and Trump...I might actually support Trump. Maybe. I'd probably vote Independent, but as a European, I'd choose Trump just on the basis that he'd probably not finish the whole term and the fact that he's got the ability to manipulate the masses. He's obviously not a good choice, but he's good entertainment. It's not like he's going to do the decisive majority of leading the country, is he?
Anyway, even as I am, I'd probably get a free magazine and then not be specially cared about, which is fine. That would mean I could do pretty much what I want without a care. Win for me.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 28, 2016, 04:58:20 am
There can only be one
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 28, 2016, 05:07:30 am
Then again, I also said I'm Christian, since I've been baptized so that's what would show up on Government papers.Baptism makes you Christian?
The US records your baptism?
What?
Post by: Putnam on July 28, 2016, 05:48:08 am
Post by: Teneb on July 28, 2016, 05:57:14 am
Maybe it's a thing where they're from?Then again, I also said I'm Christian, since I've been baptized so that's what would show up on Government papers.Baptism makes you Christian?
The US records your baptism?
What?
Anyway...
560 - You are the worst person
Projected fate: Mandatory Stay, Trump Resort Guantanamo Bay
Yay, free resort
Post by: Emma on July 28, 2016, 06:24:08 am
Projected fate: One year in a room alone with Ben Carson.
Damn, that'll suck.
Post by: Wimopy on July 28, 2016, 06:37:48 am
Then again, I also said I'm Christian, since I've been baptized so that's what would show up on Government papers.Baptism makes you Christian?
The US records your baptism?
What?
Yeah, it's a thing in my country, for the most part. Not sure if the government records it, but in people's thinking: baptised = Christian. Since, technically, that makes your part of the Christian Church, regardless of your own faith, unless you officially convert to something else.
Personally, I'm closer to atheistic or agnostic (though not purely, I'm not quite sure what I think, for the most case I just avoid religion). However, I could have a religious wedding, while someone who was not baptised could not (unless converted, of course).
In other words: based on people's thinking, despite them not really going to church, most people here would claim to be Christian if asked, just because they were baptised.
My answer varies based on context: If it was based on whether I'd need special attention because of religious doctrines, I'm atheistic/none. If it was a question about which religious denomination I'm under, I'd answer Christian. If it was about my personal beliefs, I'd choose the option closest to 'don't care'.
It feels kinda like if you asked an atheistic Jew about whether he was a Jew or not. At least, that's the way I feel about it. I'm not sure what I'd answer in an official poll, I guess it depends on how I was asked. "Which religious group/denomination are you a part of?" vs "Which group's religious teachings do you follow?"
Post by: Orange Wizard on July 28, 2016, 06:41:38 am
Post by: AzyWng on July 28, 2016, 08:56:58 am
Projected fate: One year in a room alone with Ben Carson
Post by: Tiruin on July 28, 2016, 09:14:18 am
Although given the theme of the subject, I don't know if it is to find humor or for a melancholic view of one man's...competence as a leader.
Post by: TempAcc on July 28, 2016, 09:15:00 am
722 - OKAY PERSON, PRETTY CLUELESS
Projected fate: RIDE ON ESCALATOR AT TRUMP TOWER
AW YISS
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 28, 2016, 09:21:31 am
Quote
691 - IRRELEVANT CLOWN
Projected fate: FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO TRUMP MAGAZINE
lelelelel
LET THE REVOLT PLANNING BEGIN, DISGUISED UNDER A CLOAK OF BEING IRRELEVANT CLOWNS!
Post by: mainiac on July 28, 2016, 10:27:46 am
Projected fate: roughed up
Post by: martinuzz on July 28, 2016, 10:38:30 am
projected fate: Meat processor at Trump Steaks
Looks like I'm a slightly better worst person that you, maniac. Or worse worst, confused.
Meat processor sounds about right.
"worst" is the Dutch word for sausage
"Trump Steaks" makes me think about that good old game, Abe's Oddworld Odyssee
Post by: Tiruin on July 28, 2016, 10:39:22 am
573 - YOU ARE THE WORST PERSONI am worst person! :D Hooray!
projected fate: Meat processor at Trump Steaks
349 - YOU ARE THE WORST PERSONAt least Trump doesn't kill me.
Projected fate: DEPORTED
Post by: Spehss _ on July 28, 2016, 01:44:14 pm
Behold fate, inescapable, inscrutable, inevitable. (https://freetrumpscore.com/)
783 - GREAT PERSON, THE BEST
PROJECTED FATE: LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP AT MAR-A-LAGO
Whew.
Oh yeah, forgot the conspiracy results.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on July 28, 2016, 02:28:31 pm
Post by: Culise on July 28, 2016, 02:41:57 pm
Curious, anyone find out how you can get the extremes? I've been messing around with it and have only made it to 305 and 844.I managed to hit 303 as a poor Hispanic Mexican genderfluid LGBTQ Muslim with large hands who isn't voting Trump.
Post by: Baffler on July 28, 2016, 02:54:04 pm
Projected fate: RIOT GUARD, ARMY OF TRUMP(TM)
Noice.
Post by: mainiac on July 28, 2016, 05:31:55 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on July 28, 2016, 05:37:26 pm
Curious, anyone find out how you can get the extremes? I've been messing around with it and have only made it to 305 and 844.I managed an 845, but mostly, you're praying to RNGesus.
Got a 301, as well.
Post by: Tawa on July 28, 2016, 05:42:21 pm
Projected fate: AMBASSADOR TO MEXICO (ASK FOR THAT WALL $$$)
hooray
Post by: Baffler on July 28, 2016, 05:49:22 pm
You get to be the one who roughs me up, Baffler.
We're gonna make voter intimidation great again
Post by: Spehss _ on July 28, 2016, 05:54:42 pm
Post by: Whisperling on July 29, 2016, 12:45:06 am
Projected fate: FREE SUBSCRIPTION TO TRUMP MAGAZINE
Thought I'd be a lot lower, but eh. Now I get to be very mildly ashamed of myself. Yay?
Post by: Kot on July 29, 2016, 01:04:52 am
Post by: Greiger on July 29, 2016, 01:17:28 am
Projected fate: Wall construction duty
From what I can tell he only likes me at all because I'm an American born white male. And he hates me.... mostly because I hate his guts and am not religious.
Shame little miss Treason isn't any better. First election since I got the power to vote that I'm likely going to abstain out of pure disgust at the system.
Post by: milo christiansen on July 29, 2016, 01:54:52 pm
766 - GREAT PERSON, THE BEST
Projected fate: CONTESTANT ON THE APPRENTICE: (NOT SO) PRESIDENTIAL EDITION
Hmm...
Post by: Flying Dice on July 29, 2016, 06:13:36 pm
Post by: Cheeetar on August 01, 2016, 03:46:33 am
Spoiler: My Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Emma on August 01, 2016, 04:13:28 am
Which stereotypical gender role do you conform to? (http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/test.php)
Spoiler: My results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergarr on August 01, 2016, 05:43:42 am
Which stereotypical gender role do you conform to? (http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/test.php)
Spoiler: uh (click to show/hide)
Post by: NullForceOmega on August 01, 2016, 05:48:02 am
Post by: scrdest on August 01, 2016, 05:51:47 am
Sheesh, three feminine results right off the bat? Guess I'm the odd one out: 83% masculinity, 25% femininity, for an overall result of typically masculine.Similar, 83/44%. You fetch the brewskis, I'll murder the cow with my BEAR HANDS and we'll do some grilling on some power tools, k bromatefriend?
Post by: mainiac on August 01, 2016, 05:54:39 am
Post by: Teneb on August 01, 2016, 05:58:28 am
Post by: TempAcc on August 01, 2016, 07:40:05 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
What is this I'm not good with
Post by: Erkki on August 01, 2016, 07:45:28 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Teneb on August 01, 2016, 07:50:33 am
Wait, does that mean Teneb is only 70%... Genderable? I don't get this, since I scored higher than you in both criteria.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
What is this I'm not good withcomputersgenders.
As you can see I'm 30% DeathswordYes it is.Deathsword is not a gender.Teneb has not revealed their gender, afaik. Unless it's on their profile. Who even looks at profiles though?Teneb is Deathsword :P
Post by: Criptfeind on August 01, 2016, 07:57:56 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Welp.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on August 01, 2016, 08:08:40 am
Wait, does that mean Teneb is only 70%... Genderable?
Scrdest has 83/44, so I think it scales out of 100% for each result.
Post by: scrdest on August 01, 2016, 08:13:56 am
33/28It's probably that you start at 50/50, and it's incremented or decremented by agreeing/disagreeing with gendered descriptors. So if you Strongly Agree with both masculine and feminine, you could get 100/100, if you Strongly Disagree with both - 0/0.Wait, does that mean Teneb is only 70%... Genderable?
Scrdest has 83/44, so I think it scales out of 100% for each result.
Post by: Orange Wizard on August 01, 2016, 08:51:12 am
Much macho
Post by: Culise on August 01, 2016, 09:09:04 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hee. Not unexpected.
Post by: scrdest on August 01, 2016, 09:34:16 am
(http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/verticalChart.php?masculine=53&feminine=0)Mucho?
Much macho
Post by: birdy51 on August 01, 2016, 09:35:34 am
69 Fem
Result: Casually Feminine. I can dig it.
Post by: Spehss _ on August 01, 2016, 10:37:27 am
F: 14
Typically masculine.
Post by: Tawa on August 01, 2016, 10:57:57 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Elephant Parade on August 01, 2016, 11:01:01 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on August 01, 2016, 12:44:57 pm
Post by: Arcvasti on August 01, 2016, 12:46:12 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not terribly surprising.
Post by: Arx on August 01, 2016, 12:55:31 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: pisskop on August 01, 2016, 01:05:43 pm
67% man
17% feminine
And I dont altogeher think that wrong.
Post by: Elephant Parade on August 01, 2016, 01:08:41 pm
Wait, the combined total can break 100%? That's pretty weird.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Erkki on August 01, 2016, 01:11:45 pm
Wait, the combined total can break 100%? That's pretty weird.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeh. 69-61% here too.
Post by: Kansa on August 01, 2016, 01:29:36 pm
72% Feminine
Extremely Feminine
Kind of the result I expected :p, though maybe not to that extreme.
Post by: Culise on August 01, 2016, 02:11:56 pm
Think of it this way: it's not that you're 56% masculine and 47% feminine. Rather, it's that you exhibit 56% of the masculine traits tested for and 47% of the feminine traits tested for.Wait, the combined total can break 100%? That's pretty weird.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on August 01, 2016, 02:24:12 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Undifferentiated Androgynous.
Okay..?
Edit: Trump score: 615 (or 586 if I say I have no religion, which I guess is more true)
Perhaps more amusingly, it says I'll get deported, which might actually happen. Hoho.
Post by: Orange Wizard on August 01, 2016, 06:29:42 pm
Is this a conspiracy to balance out the 13:1?
Post by: TempAcc on August 01, 2016, 06:34:29 pm
Post by: pisskop on August 01, 2016, 06:38:14 pm
We're not all raging football players, I guess. Conflict has better solutions than violence, communication is important and we know this, etc.
but I am...
Post by: heydude6 on August 01, 2016, 07:35:11 pm
Post by: SquatchHammer on August 01, 2016, 08:47:13 pm
64% male-72% Female.
The high amount to male is the surprising part for me.
Post by: Tiruin on August 02, 2016, 06:33:52 am
Something new. Which stereotypical gender role do you conform to? (http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/test.php)
Spoiler: Well uh... (click to show/hide)
I'm wondering if this stereotype is the 'typical "west"' idea, because there are a lot of very...general characteristics that would be out of place even if applied one over the other towards one gender or not.
But then, this test is pretty...skewed. :P That rating scale isn't to be used that way, that well.
It's probably that you start at 50/50, and it's incremented or decremented by agreeing/disagreeing with gendered descriptors. So if you Strongly Agree with both masculine and feminine, you could get 100/100, if you Strongly Disagree with both - 0/0.That's a lot of gendered things then. XD I didn't put it on the fully agree/disagree part though.
Post by: Cheeetar on August 02, 2016, 07:09:23 am
I'm wondering if this stereotype is the 'typical "west"' idea, because there are a lot of very...general characteristics that would be out of place even if applied one over the other towards one gender or not.
I do think the test is incredibly west-focused. It mentions that it's been used with success in multiple different regions, such as the USA, Canada, and 'several European countries'. What little validity it holds in measuring how people hold up to stereotypes would pretty much vanish outside of that bubble.
Post by: Tiruin on August 02, 2016, 07:13:10 am
Teehee, validity. x3I'm wondering if this stereotype is the 'typical "west"' idea, because there are a lot of very...general characteristics that would be out of place even if applied one over the other towards one gender or not.
I do think the test is incredibly west-focused. It mentions that it's been used with success in multiple different regions, such as the USA, Canada, and 'several European countries'. What little validity it holds in measuring how people hold up to stereotypes would pretty much vanish outside of that bubble.
Yep, it's (it has?) pretty much vanished here. :P Tested it out with our 'local stereotypes' and it seems we rank along feminine whereas compared to what I assume is the time of when that test had a sense of reliability, it'd seem to be actual 'masculine' traits instead. Hah! xD
Post by: Sergarr on August 02, 2016, 07:14:41 am
Post by: Tiruin on August 02, 2016, 07:19:32 am
Internet surveys: confirming again that gender stereotypes are bullshit.Yo. :P A stereotype by itself shouldn't comprise the foremost conclusion anyone has about anything. It is a general set of similar characteristics surrounding a concept, to make sense of that concept.
I mean the gender differentiation wars thing isn't even a permanent thing in the first place--it is due to the (over the generations) progression of society, depending on the area and specific place, and how things worked over years of people's lives. Main point is that they shouldn't apply in the first place, if used to label. :P
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 02, 2016, 09:50:18 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Harry Baldman on August 02, 2016, 12:02:06 pm
Post by: Steelmagic on August 02, 2016, 03:05:08 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I have to say, regardless of anything the evenness pleases me.
Expected more masculine, though, as I have issues expressing emotion and showing sympathy, I do sympathize, I just can't show it. Also being frank to the point of seeming almost harsh, sometimes.
Post by: Orange Wizard on August 02, 2016, 03:09:48 pm
I used to be confused for a really ugly girl all the time back in schoolI'm pretty jelly
Post by: Rolan7 on August 02, 2016, 03:41:38 pm
Internet surveys: confirming again that gender stereotypes are bullshit.This is what I came away from it feeling, too. It's kind of a wake-up call... I didn't really think a lot of these stereotypes were still taken seriously by experts. It's no wonder so many guys are getting feminine results, it basically just means admitting to feelings and emotions instead of being a dominant loner.
But yeah, it's a good demonstration that there's more to personality than estrogen and testosterone. Gender is an obsolete concept. At least as a binary, and even as an euphemism for "passive emotional and needy" vs "dominant stoic individualist". People just don't have to fit those molds anymore, at least in civilized countries.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 02, 2016, 03:51:56 pm
Internet surveys: confirming again that gender stereotypes are bullshit.Also, confirming that I'm really not a fan of strong opinions.
Post by: A Thing on August 02, 2016, 04:01:55 pm
(http://i.imgur.com/snO21kL.png)
I'm one of those people who donates their gender points to charity.
Probably got that because I voted neutral on a lot of things. I mean, when given choices like "Are you likable? Yes. No." I'm not going to go one way or the other.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on August 02, 2016, 04:06:17 pm
My Trump Score was:
737 - OKAY PERSON, PRETTY CLUELESS
Projected fate: RIOT GUARD, ARMY OF TRUMP(TM)
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on August 02, 2016, 04:59:00 pm
42% Masculine, 69% Feminine, which puts me at Casually Feminine. I don't necessarily see how.
675 - IRRELEVANT CLOWN
Projected fate: MEAT PROCESSOR AT TRUMP STEAKS
Zero comment.
Post by: Orange Wizard on August 03, 2016, 12:58:58 am
I don't necessarily see how.Because trying to analyse real people by applying stereotypes is retarded, probably
Post by: Tiruin on August 08, 2016, 12:25:42 am
Ww-wha o_O It's not actually taken seriously, when 'seriously' means 'literally as is'. It can be used as a point of reference as to the current happenings given how in many societies, due to shifts over generations there have been emphasis based on superficial characteristics as to certain characteristics in turn (ie Strength; biologically male; some culture characteristics around emphasis of strength, etc...)Internet surveys: confirming again that gender stereotypes are bullshit.This is what I came away from it feeling, too. It's kind of a wake-up call... I didn't really think a lot of these stereotypes were still taken seriously by experts. It's no wonder so many guys are getting feminine results, it basically just means admitting to feelings and emotions instead of being a dominant loner.
Maybe it appears common in general society due to how communication works and such, in the social setting.
Yes. :PI don't necessarily see how.Because trying to analyse real people by applying stereotypes is retarded, probably
Always remember that in technical terms, a stereotype is a GENERALIZED bunch of ideas similar in category. "Similar" in this respect is contextually bound, and doesn't necessarily mean 'similar in a holistic sense', but more along how the concept is characterized. People, of course, are a LOT more complex, deep, and not able to be defined so superficially :P Stereotypes are studied under cognitive development in how we conceptualize the world around us.
But using stereotypes along won't even bring you close to actually getting to know people.
Edit: Oh wow this is on the 3rd page of my newbox and I'm replying nearly a week late. ._.
Tiny query: How come we don't have a 'what does Hilary Clinton think' to be alongside Trump? Seems like we're working with humor with top American candidates so...any link on that point? :O
Post by: Flying Dice on August 08, 2016, 07:31:08 am
Post by: Orange Wizard on August 08, 2016, 07:43:52 am
Because every answer would be "gullible rube" no matter how you responded. :P(http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/verticalChart.php?masculine=0&feminine=100)
WE DO REAL SYCHOLOGY GUISE I SWER
Post by: Tiruin on August 08, 2016, 07:34:07 pm
>_> <.< I'm still content with my results. Myah. :IBecause every answer would be "gullible rube" no matter how you responded. :P(http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/verticalChart.php?masculine=0&feminine=100)
WE DO REAL SYCHOLOGY GUISE I SWER
Even if on a very quick split second hindsight insight I saw that wow this actually is pretty stoopidly stereotypical and very unreliable at best.
Wondering how many tries you got to get those results. :P
Post by: Flying Dice on August 08, 2016, 07:57:58 pm
Post by: pisskop on August 08, 2016, 08:07:39 pm
Post by: Tiruin on August 08, 2016, 08:08:39 pm
Its actually an experiment on the effect of implied stereotypes upon forum discussionsAnd then we were unwilling, non-consenting participants! O_O *uncomfortable realization sounds*
Yeah it's literally just '50s gender role stereotypes in question form. Absolutely meaningless.It's useful for us who haven't lived through those kinds of years, since the internet is internationally open. :P
...Obviously not useful in terms of forming a holistic idea about these things, but y'know: Context.
Post by: Rolan7 on August 08, 2016, 08:18:32 pm
Wondering how many tries you got to get those results. :P(http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/verticalChart.php?masculine=100&feminine=100)
I win!
(They check that the values in the URL are integers between 0 and 100, that's about it.)
Post by: Flying Dice on August 08, 2016, 08:24:30 pm
I suppose so. Though to be honest even as far as stereotypes go they aren't particularly interesting.Yeah it's literally just '50s gender role stereotypes in question form. Absolutely meaningless.It's useful for us who haven't lived through those kinds of years, since the internet is internationally open. :P
...Obviously not useful in terms of forming a holistic idea about these things, but y'know: Context.
Post by: Helgoland on August 09, 2016, 06:43:48 pm
*uncomfortable realization sounds*From hell's heart I sig at thee!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on August 10, 2016, 01:24:10 am
Wow. If they had any credibility left, they lost it with that.Wondering how many tries you got to get those results. :P(http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/verticalChart.php?masculine=100&feminine=100)
I win!
(They check that the values in the URL are integers between 0 and 100, that's about it.)
Post by: Arx on August 10, 2016, 09:14:21 am
Which isn't to say anything about their professional credibility.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on August 11, 2016, 11:24:26 am
Yeah, sounds right. But probably just a coincidence. Gender stereotypes suck, and every sucky clock is right twice a year.
or something
Post by: Rolan7 on August 11, 2016, 11:32:24 am
Their web/computer skills have nothing to do with their professional credibility.Yeah actually. I didn't bring up the URL-editing earlier because it really doesn't say anything about the test's validity. (Just that you can't trust what people post necessarily, and also it's a little amusing). I'm certain that loading the image URL doesn't count as a result for their built-in adjusting they mentioned.
Which isn't to say anything about their professional credibility.
But obviously I still don't particularly like the test. Probably a pretty good indicator of whether someone will call you a f- or a tomboy, and that's it.
Post by: hector13 on August 11, 2016, 11:38:31 am
Undifferentiated Androgynous, with a slight lean toward masculine.
Yeah, sounds right. But probably just a coincidence. Gender stereotypes suck, and every sucky clock is right twice a year.
or something
I thought that said sucky cock.
What is wrong with me.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on August 12, 2016, 08:58:28 am
rofl
Fate of DL: 601 - "YOU ARE THE WORST PERSON" - roughed up
Post by: pisskop on August 12, 2016, 10:20:46 am
Post by: MaximumZero on August 13, 2016, 11:50:46 am
What is wrong with me.You may or may not be extremely thirsty. I saw the same thing.
Post by: Gentlefish on August 16, 2016, 10:32:14 pm
Spoiler: I mean this is pretty accurate (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max™ on August 26, 2016, 07:25:09 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: pisskop on August 26, 2016, 07:28:08 pm
-Is there a 'Diane'? Im getting a Diane from somebody here.
-Does the month 'December' mean anything to you? She's talking about December being the time.
-oh, thats it, she's telling me to tell you that you don't need to worry about her. She wants you to move on.
-and donate monies. She says the custom will do you good.
Post by: mainiac on August 26, 2016, 07:29:13 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 17, 2016, 10:27:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's time to stop denying the truth. Now, after all this time, you shall finally have scientific verification of how much of a fucking nerd you are (scientific reliability may very).
Gaze now into that place you fear to look, and you will find me staring back at you. (http://personality-testing.info/tests/NPAS/)
Gonna bully all you nerds above 61.
Post by: Criptfeind on September 17, 2016, 10:31:31 pm
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 17, 2016, 10:32:25 pm
Quote
Your score was 70. Scores range from a low of 30 to a high of 70.
Whelp.
Post by: Culise on September 17, 2016, 10:33:56 pm
Post by: alexandertnt on September 17, 2016, 10:40:11 pm
I suppose I just don't care enough about super heroes.
Post by: Tawa on September 17, 2016, 10:42:31 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 17, 2016, 10:43:09 pm
Quote
Your score was 70.BOW BEFORE MY SUPERIOR NERDITY.
Post by: Wolfhunter107 on September 17, 2016, 10:44:32 pm
Post by: Eric Blank on September 17, 2016, 10:44:47 pm
Not the good kind, sadly.
But before looking at the thread I immediately saw a poll with ranges of numbers and entered the middle ground spontaneously so I squandered my vote :P
Post by: Elephant Parade on September 17, 2016, 10:45:55 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 17, 2016, 10:48:35 pm
But before looking at the thread I immediately saw a poll with ranges of numbers and entered the middle ground spontaneously so I squandered my vote :PJesus christ you people
This isn't even the first time this has happened. This isn't even the fifth time this has happened, and that's just the ones I know about.
Post by: Sirus on September 17, 2016, 10:51:01 pm
Post by: TempAcc on September 17, 2016, 10:51:55 pm
Maybe its because I don't care much about super heroes and I'm ok with talking to people IRL :U
And really, nowadays, does anyone even waste their time on libraries? I've read several books this year on PDF and ebook format.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 17, 2016, 10:54:02 pm
56.
I suppose I just don't care enough about super heroes.
Hey I didn't care about them either and I still hit a 70.
Post by: hector13 on September 17, 2016, 11:07:04 pm
Post by: Whisperling on September 17, 2016, 11:12:26 pm
Interestingly, I answered "strongly disagree" on the superheroes thing. Am really ridiculous in terms of the reading/library stuff, though, so that probably played a role.
Post by: Skyrunner on September 17, 2016, 11:25:50 pm
22% masculine, 27% feminine.
The nerdiness test gave me 51%, probably because I don't give a damn about superheroes and I crave being social (despite being socially awkward) :V
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 17, 2016, 11:26:59 pm
49.Congratulations, you have been awarded the REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE- Prize for Prime Normalcy.
Was expecting it to be higher, actually. Was probably just a wee bit off on one of the questions (I answered "disagree" on one that should've been neutral), but still, close enough.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 17, 2016, 11:34:09 pm
That's not even how correlation works. :v
Post by: Skyrunner on September 17, 2016, 11:39:14 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 17, 2016, 11:40:11 pm
I'm not even a psychologist and I know they're doing it wrong.
reeeeeeeeeeee
Post by: NullForceOmega on September 17, 2016, 11:41:12 pm
Post by: Solifuge on September 18, 2016, 12:16:15 am
Something new. Which stereotypical gender role do you conform to? (http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/test.php)
Also, I expected to score a lot more middle-of-the-road, but...
Spoiler: ...shit let's have a Gender: (click to show/hide)
Apparently all the swearing and analyticalness and asserting myself and whatever else are not enough to counterbalance how much I want to hug people and shit. As in Vulgate for "etc." I don't have to shit right now, and I think that's pretty gender-agnostic.
Post by: Putnam on September 18, 2016, 12:27:29 am
based on poll results, that makes me lower than all of you nerds
Post by: Putnam on September 18, 2016, 12:34:59 am
Spoiler: I am gender (click to show/hide)
Post by: Max™ on September 18, 2016, 12:42:03 am
They passed my test though, when I did the extra questions I left the religion unchanged--as it is not a question that applies to me--and the prompt didn't insist I finish it, good for them, I would have just shut the tab if they tried that.
Post by: Kot on September 18, 2016, 02:41:00 am
Meh.
Post by: WillowLuman on September 18, 2016, 02:58:51 am
Post by: Max™ on September 18, 2016, 03:12:04 am
Post by: Tiruin on September 18, 2016, 04:15:37 am
Funnily, I got the same result on the gender role test as I did when I took a formal, expensive one: undifferentiated androgynous. Of course, the psychologist took this to mean I wasn't sufficiently exposed to gender roles as a little kid because clearly I had asperger's syndrome...Those last 8 words o_o
22% masculine, 27% feminine.
The nerdiness test gave me 51%, probably because I don't give a damn about superheroes and I crave being social (despite being socially awkward) :V
Yeah, totally affecting me too.
Quote
Your score was 68. Scores range from a low of 30 to a high of 70. The exact average score is 50. People who score higher on the NPAS are more likely to identify as nerds. Below is a graph of what percent of people say yes when asked the question "Are you a nerd?" based on what their NPAS score was.Looove me some communication with people, despite having gained a negative trait of social awkwardness somewhere in the past. :P
Post by: TD1 on September 18, 2016, 05:12:44 am
Edit: 42/42 on the gender thing.
Err....great?
Post by: hector13 on September 18, 2016, 07:43:04 am
They do say 50 is average, though that does seem arbitrary...
Not sure how the ones below that would work, because I don't think I ever found out how baseball projections work for numbers below 60. They use a 20-80 scale, so you know where I'm coming from. Not that it explains anything...
Post by: hops on September 18, 2016, 07:50:57 am
Post by: kilakan on September 18, 2016, 07:58:17 am
Post by: AzyWng on September 18, 2016, 09:46:36 am
Quote
Your score was 61. Scores range from a low of 30 to a high of 70
Huh.
Post by: Flying Dice on September 18, 2016, 10:19:27 am
Quote
Your score was 70. Scores range from a low of 30 to a high of 70. The exact average score is 50. People who score higher on the NPAS are more likely to identify as nerds. Below is a graph of what percent of people say yes when asked the question "Are you a nerd?" based on what their NPAS score was.
shit
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 18, 2016, 11:13:03 am
Post by: Spehss _ on September 18, 2016, 12:08:36 pm
It would be higher if I were writing a novel, had any interest in superheroes, or didn't care about my appearance.
Post by: heydude6 on September 18, 2016, 12:40:05 pm
This feels accurate for some reason.
Post by: BlitzDungeoneer on September 18, 2016, 01:20:01 pm
So that's a thing I guess.
Post by: Furtuka on September 18, 2016, 01:55:56 pm
Post by: DAPARROT on September 18, 2016, 03:23:35 pm
Spoiler: gender thing (click to show/hide)
Post by: TheDarkStar on September 18, 2016, 03:37:10 pm
Post by: Itnetlolor on September 18, 2016, 03:56:48 pm
As for the gender one, I think I got a 61/61 for that as well.
Post by: Baffler on September 18, 2016, 04:30:37 pm
Post by: Putnam on September 18, 2016, 05:37:35 pm
AKA: I'm too much of a nerd to enjoy journalism on nerdy things.
Post by: hops on September 18, 2016, 05:40:30 pm
Post by: Solifuge on September 18, 2016, 05:44:30 pm
Post by: hops on September 18, 2016, 05:46:36 pm
Post by: TD1 on September 18, 2016, 05:54:30 pm
Interesting, since he can't know whether he knows everything, he's not omniscient.
I make no apology for the random thoughts I spewed above.
Post by: Max™ on September 18, 2016, 07:42:43 pm
Putnam, REAL Nerds read cutting-edge research straight from the scientific journal they're published in. </NerdShaming>Real nerds know the x stands for chi and still pronounce it "arks-iv" because fuck you that's why.
Post by: Helgoland on September 18, 2016, 07:44:11 pm
Unrelatedly, why couldn't God know he was omniscient?
Post by: Max™ on September 18, 2016, 07:46:00 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on September 19, 2016, 12:04:41 am
Post by: TD1 on September 19, 2016, 04:32:06 am
Wait, that x stands for chi? That makes soooooo much sense...Because that would assume that God knows what he doesn't know.
Unrelatedly, why couldn't God know he was omniscient?
Post by: Putnam on September 19, 2016, 04:43:24 am
Post by: hops on September 19, 2016, 04:49:37 am
Like, it's neither real nor imaginary. It's an idea, not a quantity.
You can make a number as big as you want but if it's a number then it's not infinity because infinit is not a number.
Post by: Helgoland on September 19, 2016, 05:58:12 am
Post by: Tiruin on September 19, 2016, 06:30:21 am
Heh, people still thinking mathematical constructs come out of physical reality and are not constructs fully independent of all other things. Cute~The way you worded this. I like it.
/me nerdly likes this :v
But in a way they do come out of physical reality--by nature of thought and connection. :P
Where do you people find those nice-r tests though? (The ones that have a bit of research or scientific appeal and background to them)
Post by: heydude6 on September 19, 2016, 07:22:12 am
Post by: MaximumZero on September 19, 2016, 09:38:47 am
Gonna bully all you nerds above 61.We are truly the same. I'm also a 61.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 19, 2016, 09:46:23 am
This is true suffering.Gonna bully all you nerds above 61.We are truly the same. I'm also a 61.
Post by: Flying Dice on September 19, 2016, 10:36:38 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 19, 2016, 10:42:27 am
Post by: Solifuge on September 19, 2016, 11:35:31 am
- Mad Science Clones
- Parallel Universe Duplicates
- Psychically Linked
- Secret Twins Separated at Birth
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on September 19, 2016, 12:04:46 pm
Choose one. MZ and MSH are:
- Mad Science Clones
- Parallel Universe Duplicates
- Psychically Linked
- Secret Twins Separated at Birth
I choose 5. One is the future version of the other who went back in time.
Post by: TD1 on September 19, 2016, 12:08:13 pm
Post by: Greiger on September 19, 2016, 12:08:46 pm
I actually scored a 60. Probably because while I find science related things interesting I will not actively go out of my way to obtain them. I passively soak up science I don't actively seek it out. I am the dish sponge that sits on the sink in a home with a quality automatic dishwasher. I absorb the occasional splash but that's it.
I also don't recall being all that weird as a kid. Yea I kept to myself, but a lot of kids did, at least in my school. So that probably reduced some points too.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 19, 2016, 12:11:01 pm
When I saw the poll question I thought it was how many more letters I felt the R's needed to be extended out. So I picked 30 I prefer to keep my nerd calls short and to the point..what the fucking
why does everybody think the poll isn't related to things
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Post by: Greiger on September 19, 2016, 12:16:16 pm
Call it an outlier :PWhen I saw the poll question I thought it was how many more letters I felt the R's needed to be extended out. So I picked 30 I prefer to keep my nerd calls short and to the point..what the fucking
why does everybody think the poll isn't related to things
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Post by: Teneb on September 19, 2016, 12:18:36 pm
I AM FINALLY A COOL KID
Post by: RedWarrior0 on September 19, 2016, 12:41:23 pm
Post by: Rolan7 on September 19, 2016, 04:02:14 pm
This is why polls should have a jokey "abstain" option and also a demonstration that people are terrible :PWhen I saw the poll question I thought it was how many more letters I felt the R's needed to be extended out. So I picked 30 I prefer to keep my nerd calls short and to the point..what the fucking
why does everybody think the poll isn't related to things
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Post by: TempAcc on September 19, 2016, 04:18:18 pm
58. Then I went and misclicked in the poll so I voted 51-55.Also the test is somewhat bullshit in that it expects you to be a complete shut-in who only goes out to go to libraries. According to the test, I am not very nerd, but my whole damn appearance and interests just scream nerd.
I AM FINALLY A COOL KID
57, give me your lunch money now.
Post by: hector13 on September 19, 2016, 04:42:29 pm
58. Then I went and misclicked in the poll so I voted 51-55.Also the test is somewhat bullshit in that it expects you to be a complete shut-in who only goes out to go to libraries. According to the test, I am not very nerd, but my whole damn appearance and interests just scream nerd.
I AM FINALLY A COOL KID
57, give me your lunch money now.
You're still above average in terms of nerdity, byraway.
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 20, 2016, 06:45:16 am
zimbabwe
Post by: Execute/Dumbo.exe on September 20, 2016, 07:42:45 am
Oh, that? I just randomly clicked options until I accidentally pressed submit.When I saw the poll question I thought it was how many more letters I felt the R's needed to be extended out. So I picked 30 I prefer to keep my nerd calls short and to the point..what the fucking
why does everybody think the poll isn't related to things
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
*Cough*
In other news, I got a 62, and just now learnt that my vocabulary needs a lot more work before I can lord it over other people.
Honestly, what the hell is 'equivocal' anyway murmble grumble
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on September 20, 2016, 07:45:12 am
Post by: SirQuiamus on September 20, 2016, 08:47:42 am
In other news, I got a 62, and just now learnt that my vocabulary needs a lot more work before I can lord it over other people.That word was actually "quivocal" in the test, so you would have been dead wrong if you had claimed to know what it meant.
Honestly, what the hell is 'equivocal' anyway murmble grumble
...I got 59, btw---which is kinda hard to believe in the light of my above comment.
Post by: Execute/Dumbo.exe on September 20, 2016, 08:52:35 am
Mm, having good diction is entirely different from being a nerd.In other news, I got a 62, and just now learnt that my vocabulary needs a lot more work before I can lord it over other people.That word was actually "quivocal" in the test, so you would have been dead wrong if you had claimed to know what it meant.
Honestly, what the hell is 'equivocal' anyway murmble grumble
...I got 59, btw---which is kinda hard to believe in the light of my above comment.
Well, that's a dirty lie, but only one or two of the questions are related much to your vocabulary, so there.
Post by: Flying Dice on September 20, 2016, 08:55:39 am
Post by: SirQuiamus on September 20, 2016, 09:08:49 am
I took the test again, and it actually says "cuivocal," not "quivocal." Not that it matters one bit since the word is meaningless anyway, but some kind of deeply-ingrained pedantic nerdiness compels me to point it out all the same.Mm, having good diction is entirely different from being a nerd.In other news, I got a 62, and just now learnt that my vocabulary needs a lot more work before I can lord it over other people.That word was actually "quivocal" in the test, so you would have been dead wrong if you had claimed to know what it meant.
Honestly, what the hell is 'equivocal' anyway murmble grumble
...I got 59, btw---which is kinda hard to believe in the light of my above comment.
Well, that's a dirty lie, but only one or two of the questions are related much to your vocabulary, so there.
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 20, 2016, 10:15:53 am
The power-level hiding nerds have officially started outpacing the cringe-compilation vid nerds. This will be valuable information.Be wary of crypto-nerds
Post by: hops on September 20, 2016, 04:08:30 pm
Post by: TD1 on September 20, 2016, 04:15:08 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on September 20, 2016, 04:56:43 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on September 20, 2016, 09:50:30 pm
That's the official FBI/CIA/Illuminati/DOJ/Gnomeland Security story. No one really knows the truth. Or do they?Choose one. MZ and MSH are:
- Mad Science Clones
- Parallel Universe Duplicates
- Psychically Linked
- Secret Twins Separated at Birth
I choose 5. One is the future version of the other who went back in time.
Post by: nenjin on September 20, 2016, 10:33:17 pm
Post by: hops on September 21, 2016, 02:48:32 am
Post by: Sebastian2203 on September 21, 2016, 12:06:43 pm
Post by: hops on September 21, 2016, 12:07:59 pm
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on September 25, 2016, 03:43:43 pm
Also, Cinder, that does not compute. Plenty of stupid people have good lives. QoL does not correlate strongly with intelligence.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on September 25, 2016, 06:08:41 pm
Post by: WillowLuman on October 03, 2016, 01:30:47 am
I got Black Mare, though I think I misclicked the 5th or 6th question
Post by: Reudh on October 03, 2016, 01:35:54 am
Seeing how my life has went and I'm 2 points from the maximum I'd say that it doesn't really correlate with intelligence.
also aren't you like 14 or something? you haven't really experienced all life has yet.
Post by: hops on October 03, 2016, 02:31:00 am
Also I'm not saying I have a bad life, but it's certainly not one of an intellectual.
Post by: Cruxador on October 03, 2016, 07:22:57 pm
https://freetrumpscore.com/
663 - IRRELEVANT CLOWN
Projected fate: ONE YEAR IN A ROOM ALONE WITH BEN CARSON
http://www.celebritytypes.com/gender/test.php
44% Masculine, 36% Feminine
This makes you Undifferentiated-Androgynous
http://personality-testing.info/tests/NPAS/
56
Some of these were probably off. Like, science related TV, I don't watch any TV really. I also lost a bunch for not really reading a lot of books, despite the fact that part of the reason for that is that I read so much research and spend so much time online. Considering how much fiction I read when I'm off the grid, my answers would change a lot if I were to answer some other time.
Post by: hops on October 04, 2016, 06:45:58 am
Projected fate: ROUGHED UP
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on October 04, 2016, 07:35:24 am
I'm 18, dude.
Also I'm not saying I have a bad life, but it's certainly not one of an intellectual.
What IS a "life of an intellectual", anyway?
Post by: hops on October 04, 2016, 07:47:24 am
Tech start up young adults, etc.I'm 18, dude.
Also I'm not saying I have a bad life, but it's certainly not one of an intellectual.
What IS a "life of an intellectual", anyway?
Post by: Digital Hellhound on October 04, 2016, 08:02:40 am
Post by: hops on October 04, 2016, 08:04:48 am
Post by: Flying Dice on October 04, 2016, 08:05:45 am
Tech start up young adults, etc.I'm 18, dude.
Also I'm not saying I have a bad life, but it's certainly not one of an intellectual.
What IS a "life of an intellectual", anyway?
Sounds more like the life of an arrogant dickhead tbh though. The sort of place where they keep Segways for intra-office transport and mandate a dress code of capris and plaid.
@Potterlol: Rofl no I'm not making an account for that shit.
Post by: hops on October 04, 2016, 08:17:18 am
Exactly.Tech start up young adults, etc.I'm 18, dude.
Also I'm not saying I have a bad life, but it's certainly not one of an intellectual.
What IS a "life of an intellectual", anyway?
Sounds more like the life of an arrogant dickhead tbh though. The sort of place where they keep Segways for intra-office transport and mandate a dress code of capris and plaid.
@Potterlol: Rofl no I'm not making an account for that shit.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on October 04, 2016, 10:32:21 am
Post by: hops on October 04, 2016, 10:39:37 am
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on October 04, 2016, 10:59:46 am
It's fine to do want to do something big. But if you can't do that, it doesn't mean that you aren't living an "intellectual life".
Post by: Cruxador on October 04, 2016, 06:28:27 pm
I'm 18, dude.Well, he wasn't much off.
Sounds more like the life of an arrogant dickhead tbh though. The sort of place where they keep Segways for intra-office transport and mandate a dress code of capris and plaid.So, someone who would call himself an intellectual.
Post by: AzyWng on October 06, 2016, 10:15:55 am
Quote
"I am humble" ~ something humble people don't say
I believe the same could go for intellectuals.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on October 06, 2016, 11:48:58 am
Post by: Spehss _ on October 06, 2016, 12:30:01 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 06, 2016, 01:47:26 pm
something something dunning-kruger something somethingsomething yeah something
Post by: Tiruin on October 07, 2016, 12:13:01 am
something something dunning-kruger something somethingI should seriously expound on that phenomenon of that effect one day >_< because there's a lot that can be understood that is a bit misplaced along the way of understanding it.
Especially considering the whole field of 'self-descriptions and when or why/how do we apply them'?
Post by: Reudh on October 07, 2016, 04:14:29 am
I'm 18, dude.
Also I'm not saying I have a bad life, but it's certainly not one of an intellectual.
It's kinda funny how people's ages stay in stasis in one's mind until you learn otherwise :P
Anyway, mine certainly wasn't at 18 either, and I hated it. When I finally got to uni at 20, that changed everything!
Post by: TheBiggerFish on October 07, 2016, 10:47:41 am
Tiruin's Psychology Musings thread when?something something dunning-kruger something somethingI should seriously expound on that phenomenon of that effect one day >_< because there's a lot that can be understood that is a bit misplaced along the way of understanding it.
Especially considering the whole field of 'self-descriptions and when or why/how do we apply them'?
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 07, 2016, 02:16:22 pm
I got 0, which would indicate I am zero percent middle class. This is an interesting idea, as our civil office has been developing questions to reveal those who are middle class, for reasons of hilarious corbynating.
Did the same for the middle class test by the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/23/how-middle-class-are-you-it-depends-how-many-of-these-items-you/),
I got a 1 on the list - I own a dyson hoover. In my experience a dyson hoover lasts forever until someone breaks it on purpose or God decides you need your shit fucked up, good investments they are. Everything else just seems like useless swpl shit
Social class test: Britbong Beeb Corp edition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22000973)
Result:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Capital income average, capital savings lower
Very high social capital, though not that much diversity in the occupations
Very high emerging cultural capital (GET FUCKING ENRICHED SON), low highbrow cultural capital
I like the last test most, seems most useful
Post by: TD1 on October 07, 2016, 04:28:22 pm
1 on the Telegraph - We have a wood burning stove.
Technical Middle Class on the BBC
Post by: Yoink on October 07, 2016, 04:38:54 pm
(41% 19% 25% 9%)
Probably not very accurate since a lot of the questions were difficult to answer, and the answer would vary greatly due to other circumstances not covered by the question. Also I'm horribly indecisive. >.>
Post by: inteuniso on October 07, 2016, 06:47:01 pm
In other news, I started reading the fictions of Sheri S. Tepper (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheri_S._Tepper). I started off with The Awakeners, a story of a metal-poor planet inhabited by humans and raven-people. Really heavy Dark Souls vibes, with a dark pact between the two species. After finishing that in about a day and a half (was also up and around doing housework) I started on Grass.
Her writing alternates between philosophical dialectics and horrific scenes of violence, I guess popularized by Stephen King but not misused by her.
Post by: Cruxador on October 07, 2016, 08:12:06 pm
Post by: Flying Dice on October 07, 2016, 09:28:27 pm
Disclaimer: I am a hamburglar, not a crumpet-trumpet, therefore the vast majority of all of this was utterly irrelevant and often totally alien.
Post by: BorkBorkGoesTheCode on October 08, 2016, 12:34:00 am
Post by: Cthulhu on October 08, 2016, 01:20:53 am
The middle class test is so bong it's like reading an alien monolith. Part of me thinks it's just making shit up to fuck with Americans. It's like something they'd ad lib on Rick and Morty for interdimensional TV
Post by: Wight on October 08, 2016, 01:32:23 am
I(53%) N(38%) T(19%) J(12%)
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (53%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (19%)
You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (12%)
Post by: heydude6 on October 08, 2016, 10:54:24 am
INTJ
I(53%) N(38%) T(19%) J(12%)
You have moderate preference of Introversion over Extraversion (53%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (38%)
You have slight preference of Thinking over Feeling (19%)
You have slight preference of Judging over Perceiving (12%)
Wow, been a while since someone last submitted a result from the original Myers Brigs.
Anyway, back to the last middle class test. Personally I didn't find it very accurate due to how British and narrow it is. My family's annual income is around 50 000 dollars which is quite decent in Canada, and also a lot compared to the people I know. Yet for some reason, the test thinks that's pathetic. Also the social stuff is incredibly narrowly defined (There's no option for doctor, of which I know 3).
Although culture is just as narrowly defined, I think I can agree on my result since I don't regularly immerse myself in those things. There is a lack of nerd/geek culture though.
One thing the test does not take into account is the financial burden of family. If there are two people with the same income, the one that has to raise a kid is effectively poorer.
Those are all the thoughts I have to say on this test. Although my family is sorely lacking in savings, I do not consider myself an emergent service worker. Our main source of income comes from a manager at a big company, we live in a very nice apartment building that is better than many houses in raw square footage, and we have an income that just barely screws us out of many government benefits.
EDIT: Also it seems that I have posted my financials online, I'll probably delete this in a month. Don't quote this.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 08, 2016, 11:56:54 am
I got 0, of course.
Did the same for the middle class test by the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/23/how-middle-class-are-you-it-depends-how-many-of-these-items-you/),
1. I got a NutriBullet as a present.
Social class test: Britbong Beeb Corp edition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22000973)
I got "Emergent Service Workers." Young, urban, financially insecure, but somehow still cultured, a little bit.
Note: I am a real American (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhwRAgbcPnE), so take that as you will. I didn't know half of the shit they were asking.
Post by: Solifuge on October 12, 2016, 10:04:39 am
Independant: 2. I corrected someone on how to say Quinoa, and said Brillo in reference to a Brillo Pad (Sort of a steel-wool thing treated with detergent, for scrubbing cookware).
Telegraph: 1. I own matching coasters that my granddad designed and machined. They're plastic, and trap spills.
Spoiler: BBC: Emergent Service Worker (click to show/hide)
Post by: Wimopy on October 12, 2016, 10:18:30 am
These little quizes aren't really for students. I can say I know a lot of people though, like University Lecturers who are also Scientists.
Not sure why "rent" is considered worse off than "own" by the BBC. Quite a few flats in my area (London) cost more per month than a family home.
Post by: Teneb on October 12, 2016, 11:25:30 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
But that's because I am a middle-class brazilian instead of brit or even 'murrican.
Post by: hector13 on October 12, 2016, 11:43:14 am
How middle class are you? Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/how-middle-class-are-you-take-our-test-a6897551.html)
I got 0, of course.
Did the same for the middle class test by the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/23/how-middle-class-are-you-it-depends-how-many-of-these-items-you/),
1. I got a NutriBullet as a present.
Social class test: Britbong Beeb Corp edition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22000973)
I got "Emergent Service Workers." Young, urban, financially insecure, but somehow still cultured, a little bit.
Note: I am a real American (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhwRAgbcPnE), so take that as you will. I didn't know half of the shit they were asking.
Got myself a 0
Then a 1. Do I lose a point for my matching coasters being coca-cola?
Emergent Service Worker. Fancy term for being cultured but poor as dirt.
Post by: Haspen on October 12, 2016, 11:50:19 am
Post by: heydude6 on October 15, 2016, 01:44:49 am
Not sure why "rent" is considered worse off than "own" by the BBC. Quite a few flats in my area (London) cost more per month than a family home.
The reason why rent is considered bad is because once you pay the monthly bill, that money is gone. In contrast, when you buy a house you have a home you can live in and several years down the line, you can resell it for profit. Assets like these are very useful for saving money since they won't be devalued by inflation, unlike currency.
Post by: Tiruin on October 15, 2016, 03:48:37 am
How middle class are you? Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/how-middle-class-are-you-take-our-test-a6897551.html)._.
I got 0, of course.
Did the same for the middle class test by the Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/23/how-middle-class-are-you-it-depends-how-many-of-these-items-you/),
1. I got a NutriBullet as a present.
Social class test: Britbong Beeb Corp edition (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-22000973)
I got "Emergent Service Workers." Young, urban, financially insecure, but somehow still cultured, a little bit.
Note: I am a real American (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhwRAgbcPnE), so take that as you will. I didn't know half of the shit they were asking.
As an American, I do not understand these Briticisms.As a non-british person, those stuffs are more local than international. :P
Quote
Have you got your ( middle class) priorities right?
0 Right!
You are NOT Middle Class
0 Right!
the class group you most closely match is:
Emergent service workers
This class group is financially insecure, scoring low for savings and house value, but high for social and cultural factors. According to the Great British Class Survey results, lots of people in this group:
Are young
Enjoy a cultured social life
Rent their home - almost 90%
...This really reminds me of Art Attack!, back around ten or so years ago headed by Neil Buchanan (haaa I remember the naaaame!), and how he went a lot of times with PVC glue.
...Is it commonly British to brand your utilities? Because as I did all those testy-tests, I remember that. :P
Post by: Wimopy on October 15, 2016, 06:41:12 am
Not sure why "rent" is considered worse off than "own" by the BBC. Quite a few flats in my area (London) cost more per month than a family home.
The reason why rent is considered bad is because once you pay the monthly bill, that money is gone. In contrast, when you buy a house you have a home you can live in and several years down the line, you can resell it for profit. Assets like these are very useful for saving money since they won't be devalued by inflation, unlike currency.
True that, but I'm just trying to point out the fact that it is not really a good measure in itself for the social class. Besides, you could be 'renting' (I think 'leasing' might be the right word, I'm not good with financial English) a house for an amount of years. By which time even an owned house might not be in good shape.
Main issue was the black-and-whiting of owned vs rent, where I believe renting a high value property should still be a factor. Not that it would really affect the outcome of the quiz for people in question.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 20, 2016, 02:30:36 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Does that mean Trump's going to launch his coup on Christmas Eve?But there's also an even more important question than that! One which you must answer for me now. The issue of our age.
Is Die Hard a Christmas movie?
Post by: TheDarkStar on October 20, 2016, 04:02:48 pm
Is Die Hard a Christmas movie?
Yes.
If you listen to it backwards.
Post by: x2yzh9 on October 20, 2016, 04:08:19 pm
Oh wellINFP
Introvert(19%) iNtuitive(31%) Feeling(25%) Perceiving(3%)
You have slight preference of Introversion over Extraversion (19%)
You have moderate preference of Intuition over Sensing (31%)
You have moderate preference of Feeling over Thinking (25%)
You have marginal or no preference of Perceiving over Judging (3%)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 20, 2016, 06:45:12 pm
I see. The people are afraid. They do not wish it to be known that they have beliefs on the festivity of Die Hard.
Post by: Sirus on October 20, 2016, 06:55:38 pm
Except he's kinda pissy.
And he moves through vents instead of chimneys.
And the presents are bullets.
And the boys and girls aren't good.
But other than that it's practically The Night Before Christmas.
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on October 20, 2016, 07:01:05 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 20, 2016, 07:02:41 pm
Die Hard is the Christmas-est of Christmas movies.
It's A
Post by: Twinwolf on October 20, 2016, 07:04:07 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 20, 2016, 07:11:16 pm
Not Alien, though. Christ, not Alien.
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on October 20, 2016, 07:44:06 pm
Post by: Culise on October 20, 2016, 10:59:23 pm
Post by: Max™ on October 20, 2016, 11:31:01 pm
Not even kidding, Aliens is an R-rated film and it definitely could be shown to ten year olds. Maybe not younger than that, but I think if it were rated today Aliens could possibly swing a PG-13.Being trapped in a closed environment with a monster you can't defeat as it attacks those around you is my childhood, so Alien is still hard as shit to watch. Aliens is fun for the whole family.
Not Alien, though. Christ, not Alien.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 20, 2016, 11:34:16 pm
Post by: Max™ on October 20, 2016, 11:35:54 pm
They were fine, if they were psychopaths like my dad was it would have been more like The Thing I guess, which was mostly just a matter of the animatronics being so goddamn unsettling.Goddamn, man, how bad were your sisters?Not even kidding, Aliens is an R-rated film and it definitely could be shown to ten year olds. Maybe not younger than that, but I think if it were rated today Aliens could possibly swing a PG-13.Being trapped in a closed environment with a monster you can't defeat as it attacks those around you is my childhood, so Alien is still hard as shit to watch. Aliens is fun for the whole family.
Not Alien, though. Christ, not Alien.
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 21, 2016, 12:30:44 am
Post by: Dorsidwarf on October 21, 2016, 04:07:54 am
Aliens didn't scare me that much, it just seemed like an action movie with a really high body count. It was tense, but I don't think I would come away with nightmares from Aliens. Alien OTOH was creepy and unsettling as shit. The only flaw with that movie is the fact that the twist and the monster have been permanently spoiled for decades by cultural osmosis.
Also that the final confrontation with the alien where Ripley
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hops on October 27, 2016, 01:33:57 am
Post by: Tiruin on October 27, 2016, 03:42:06 am
Yeah, prior to that I thought they were using a real xenomorph.This, pretty much.
The terrifying about it (Yeah I saw it as a kid) was the more gory parts (not that detailed anyway), and the scariest bit to me wasn't how intimidating the alien was (it was intimidating because it was predatory, so yeah), but the bloody chunks that happened when it got spaced ._.
Because blood is scary when presented in a way that is totally unfamiliar but without any other guidance to understanding it.
The scary bits are when the characters you can relate with or the scene you can relate with is presented and portrayed. And a lot of thought under all that sensing is very important to note. :D
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 27, 2016, 04:11:11 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Also, I'm watching Alien 3. At about the 20-minute mark I can safely say this movie is stupid. I'm pretty open-minded about awful movies but this is just a dumb, dumb film.
Post by: Execute/Dumbo.exe on October 27, 2016, 04:21:31 am
Maybe I'm just spoiled (Buuuuut) but most of the acting seemed pretty wooden, especially Ripley, and there were a lot of weird pauses? That could just be an aspect of older movies that I've never seen before.
Post by: itisnotlogical on October 27, 2016, 04:30:44 am
Post by: Greiger on October 27, 2016, 10:24:18 am
Of course this was the age when Lavos' scream from Chrono Trigger gave me nightmares.
Post by: hector13 on October 27, 2016, 10:25:44 am
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on October 27, 2016, 03:14:43 pm
(https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTHWn5Prvtv5dUbO-t-lB3EGH4wKK1TRk5eZirPgkOKxHsCjXnaCfiFAQ)
HOW COULD YOU SAY NO TO THAT?
Post by: Solifuge on October 27, 2016, 05:19:44 pm
The issue with Alien isn't the Giger symbolism or the perverse sexuality theme, it's that it's the abject terror. There's a reason why Alien is a famous, if not maybe the most famous horror film. I'm no moral guardian, but I think it's just plain too intense for someone not at least teenager. Much like alcohol, they'd consume it without being able to appreciate it in any complete way.
Can I just say, this seems like a weird way to talk about alcohol? I don't think age lets anyone "appreciate it" more, unless there's a hidden layer I'm not appreciating? Teen or Middle-Aged, it's still moderately poisonous, makes you stupid and feel good, and drives you to sometimes impulsive, sometimes hilarious, sometimes regrettable things. Also, unlike Alien, too much booze will make you violently ill, or even kill you! I've never heard of anyone dying to a Geiger overdose. INB4 someone makes a witty comment about Ionizing Radiation. :y
But yeah, I doubt kids are going to be able to get the same thing out of Alien than they would as adults, but that doesn't make it bad for them to watch. Besides, one adult is going to have a different watching experience than another too, based on their experiences and phobias and level of cinema training, and whatever else. That's just part of being individual people, with individual experiences, yo. :D
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 27, 2016, 05:25:30 pm
Alien is the same way. Someone below like 14 is still at an age where terror = terror, and usually will not be given the kind of backhanded appreciation one gets from unpleasant but exhilarating experiences. They'll just be cranked up in fear the whole film, and a lot of horror movies can do that. I remember I had an experience like that with The Thing, which my father made me watch when I was 9 or 10 years old. The whole aspect of social paranoia and self-sacrifice was lost on me to horrifying noise and visuals.
Post by: Rolan7 on October 27, 2016, 07:20:03 pm
...Yeah, yeah, I KNOW, I was depressed. I've been drinking for about 7 years, it only got crazy and habitual in this last one.
Post by: Dozebôm Lolumzalìs on October 27, 2016, 07:26:34 pm
INB4 someone makes a witty comment about Ionizing Radiation. :yARMOKDAMN IT! You ninjaed my own thoughts!
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 27, 2016, 08:12:03 pm
Post by: hops on October 28, 2016, 12:43:57 am
http://www.clickhole.com/quiz/which-lion-lion-witch-and-wardrobe-are-you-339
Post by: Solifuge on October 28, 2016, 12:52:32 am
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on October 29, 2016, 07:57:30 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 30, 2016, 08:05:59 am
Post by: penguinofhonor on October 30, 2016, 08:10:46 am
Post by: KingofstarrySkies on October 31, 2016, 12:10:42 am
Die Hard is totally a Christmas movie. A jolly man crawls through confined spaces delivering presents to good boys and girls, what more do you want?There are people who dare say it ISN'T!?
Except he's kinda pissy.
And he moves through vents instead of chimneys.
And the presents are bullets.
And the boys and girls aren't good.
But other than that it's practically The Night Before Christmas.
Post by: Solifuge on October 31, 2016, 01:12:22 am
Post by: hops on November 04, 2016, 06:53:02 am
Man, Cinder, it took you a long time to finish that quiz. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78290.msg5401814#msg5401814)It's stupidly long tbh
Post by: Sergarr on March 07, 2017, 11:11:44 am
So here's an interesting poll about who'd you be in Russia, 1917. (http://arzamas.academy/materials/1269)
Spoiler: makes sense, I guess (click to show/hide)
Post by: smjjames on March 07, 2017, 11:31:04 am
Interesting poll thingy though.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Digital Hellhound on March 07, 2017, 11:50:11 am
Post by: AzyWng on March 07, 2017, 12:44:52 pm
Probably because I don't really know much about Russian history aside from they got super upset at the US during the Cold War.
And Vladmir Lenin was sent over to Russia by the Germans during WWI to distract Russia and keep them from fighting, or something like that.
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 07, 2017, 01:08:53 pm
I am a Menshevik Internationalist, doomed to irrelevance with the rest of the party. Interesting quiz!
Landed at the same location.
Also found out for fun that answering 'Strongly Agree' to everything lands you on Anarchist.
Post by: Steelmagic on March 07, 2017, 01:20:20 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on March 07, 2017, 02:02:22 pm
Spoiler: I am a Right SR (click to show/hide)
Post by: Teneb on March 07, 2017, 02:14:30 pm
Post by: hector13 on March 07, 2017, 02:17:02 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Left SR.
I didn't answer a lot of questions in one section, but I guess I'm alright with that.
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 07, 2017, 02:53:54 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 07, 2017, 02:58:07 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I got Menshevik Internationalist - good to see that even in the past I'd be politically marginalized.
The questions on state structure are a bit confusing, and I think I'm more familiar with this bit of history than most (thanks Kaiserreich). I'm familiar with what the Provisional Government, Soviets, and Dumas are but not so much what supporting or opposing them implies.
Post by: AzyWng on March 07, 2017, 03:01:10 pm
Also found out for fun that answering 'Strongly Agree' to everything lands you on Anarchist.
A brief skim on their section (on the graph that appears at the end of the quiz) reveals that they were one of the, ah, more radical groups, calling for the liquidation of the government and the ending of the war, among other extremes.
Post by: Cruxador on March 07, 2017, 05:39:10 pm
I got Right SR but my answers don't match.Me too.
Post by: Hanslanda on March 07, 2017, 05:46:36 pm
Post by: TheDarkStar on March 07, 2017, 06:12:28 pm
Post by: DAPARROT on March 07, 2017, 08:38:24 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: feelotraveller on March 07, 2017, 08:40:20 pm
Post by: ChairmanPoo on March 07, 2017, 08:46:05 pm
Spoiler: oh shit I'm a left deviationist (click to show/hide)
Post by: smjjames on March 07, 2017, 08:51:30 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 07, 2017, 09:04:24 pm
Where did you think Hitler got the whole "Bolshevik Jews" line from?
Post by: Flying Dice on March 07, 2017, 09:12:14 pm
Post by: smjjames on March 07, 2017, 09:15:10 pm
The situation of the Russian Jews was a massive thing around that time. Instability in the pre-revolutionary era lead to a lot of state-sponsored pogroms against Jews (See Fiddler on the Roof for what this situation was like), and if you read the description of the Black Hundreds you'll see that they were massively motivated by antisemitism.
Where did you think Hitler got the whole "Bolshevik Jews" line from?
Ah. Didn't know what the situation of Russian Jews was at the time of 1917. I figured the art was period though.
Post by: Tawa on March 07, 2017, 09:17:51 pm
Post by: misko27 on March 07, 2017, 09:24:15 pm
Post by: smjjames on March 07, 2017, 09:30:58 pm
Menshevik Defensist, which is unsurprising I suppose. Obviously, I am in full support of the war effort and upholding Russia's commitments to the war against the Central Powers (unlike you filthy internationalist traitors), and am generally supportive of democratic institutions. Oddly enough they manage to be to the left AND right of me economically (?), so in practice I end up looking neutral under them (how can you both be skeptical of private property, but oppose any sort of nationalization?).
To be fair, it did place me on the same line as menshvik internationalist, but over to the right towards defensist.
The one about public property was somewhat ambigious I think because theres public parks and those should be publicly owned (does that make national parks a communist concept? hah.). I get that the question was about farms because peasants and serfs, but it's more complex than that. I think I put mysef as neutral on that because it's a complex question. I understand the context of it for the timeperiod, but still.
Post by: Spehss _ on March 08, 2017, 05:48:25 pm
reeeeee commies fuck off of my private property reeeeeee
Post by: Baffler on March 08, 2017, 06:00:34 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 08, 2017, 06:08:34 pm
I got Cadets, which is weird because I said Russia should leave the war and that a military dictator isn't the answer, and in fact was closer to the Menshevik Defensist dot. I guess I didn't say those things hard enough?Clearly your waffling on women's liberation and secularism caused this result.
Post by: Baffler on March 08, 2017, 06:33:20 pm
I hate when that happens.I got Cadets, which is weird because I said Russia should leave the war and that a military dictator isn't the answer, and in fact was closer to the Menshevik Defensist dot. I guess I didn't say those things hard enough?Clearly your waffling on women's liberation and secularism caused this result.
Post by: Loud Whispers on March 08, 2017, 06:59:14 pm
Post by: smjjames on March 08, 2017, 07:02:38 pm
Menshevik Centrist. Bleh, I turned out disgustingly neutral
I wonder what happens if you, put neutral on everything?
*does the thing*
Right SR and the dot right smack in the middle, heh.
Post by: FearfulJesuit on March 08, 2017, 08:45:35 pm
Post by: Angle on March 08, 2017, 10:13:50 pm
Post by: Culise on March 08, 2017, 11:05:48 pm
...darn it. Now, I'm wondering what secularism waffles would taste like.I got Cadets, which is weird because I said Russia should leave the war and that a military dictator isn't the answer, and in fact was closer to the Menshevik Defensist dot. I guess I didn't say those things hard enough?Clearly your waffling on women's liberation and secularism caused this result.
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on March 09, 2017, 05:56:39 pm
I dunno what they taste like, but I know what they don't do...darn it. Now, I'm wondering what secularism waffles would taste like.I got Cadets, which is weird because I said Russia should leave the war and that a military dictator isn't the answer, and in fact was closer to the Menshevik Defensist dot. I guess I didn't say those things hard enough?Clearly your waffling on women's liberation and secularism caused this result.
turn into the flesh of a Jewish dude as you eat them
Post by: Gentlefish on March 09, 2017, 06:38:52 pm
Post by: ChairmanPoo on March 09, 2017, 06:42:48 pm
Menshevik Centrist. Bleh, I turned out disgustingly neutral
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on March 09, 2017, 06:42:59 pm
Post by: Grapefruit Sorcerer on March 11, 2017, 03:28:32 am
Does that mean I'm a commie now?
Post by: Digital Hellhound on March 11, 2017, 09:10:17 am
Right SR.
Does that mean I'm a commie now?
Just an agrarian populist. You'll probably go on to die with the monarchists, liberals and the rest of the losers on the White side in the Civil War.
Man, the Mensheviks wish they'd have been this popular in real life. Bolsheviks being in the minority is pretty historical, though (how much depends on which historians you ask). SRs should also be massively leading, but I guess Bay12 doesn't have enough hungry peasants.
Post by: Harry Baldman on March 11, 2017, 10:08:38 am
Post by: Harry Baldman on March 11, 2017, 10:59:53 am
I'm apparently a Menshevik Internationalist.
I have no clue what this means about me.
It would mean that 1918 would in all likelihood be a poor year for you to be alive and politically active in, and the rest after that would hardly be any better.
Post by: George_Chickens on March 11, 2017, 11:25:52 am
Post by: Grapefruit Sorcerer on March 11, 2017, 04:08:59 pm
Just an agrarian populist. You'll probably go on to die with the monarchists, liberals and the rest of the losers on the White side in the Civil War.better dead than red
Post by: Helgoland on March 11, 2017, 04:16:23 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on March 16, 2017, 08:42:52 pm
I got Menshevik InternationalistOf course, I did, too.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 16, 2017, 08:56:36 pm
ıʇ ʞǝǝds ɥɐddǝuıuƃ¡I got Menshevik InternationalistOf course, I did, too.
Post by: Ama on March 16, 2017, 09:18:07 pm
Post by: Culise on March 16, 2017, 10:24:02 pm
Im apparently an anarchist. *Waves molotov threateningly* :P
Spoiler: Beware, for when you wave the molotov, the molotov waves back (click to show/hide)
Post by: AzyWng on March 17, 2017, 11:15:35 pm
I'll drink to that. Or I would, if I weren't underage.Im apparently an anarchist. *Waves molotov threateningly* :PSpoiler: Beware, for when you wave the molotov, the molotov waves back (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sergarr on March 17, 2017, 11:24:11 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on March 17, 2017, 11:35:38 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on March 17, 2017, 11:41:22 pm
So, wait, how did I manage to become seemingly the only person here to be "far away from the political forces of 1917 Russia"?I have no idea.
Post by: misko27 on March 18, 2017, 12:14:09 am
Or perhaps because he committed the unpardonable sin of not supporting Russia's obligations to its allies in WWI. I'm fucking on to you, god damned kaiser-sympathizing commie bastards. Don't think you can hide from me.
Post by: Solifuge on April 27, 2017, 01:28:34 am
https://mkremins.github.io/genderquiz/ (https://mkremins.github.io/genderquiz/)
This is a highly revelatory and educational quiz, brought to us courtesy of this one nerd (https://twitter.com/maxkreminski). I simply must recommend it for everyone.
Spoiler: Results (Might want to wait until you take the quiz) (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 27, 2017, 01:32:45 am
Spoiler: Final Gender Identity (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on April 27, 2017, 01:56:26 am
Just, that? I mean, ok? I'm guessing this is what happens when you respond in the negative for "I sometimes feel that I am experiencing emotions." But I'm a seriously unimpressive robot man, I got freaking gypped.
Post by: Arx on April 27, 2017, 03:07:46 am
Post by: Donuts on April 27, 2017, 03:39:35 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tiruin on April 27, 2017, 05:16:20 am
Oh no! It's been more than a month since we've had a thing to Shit Let's Be! I will fix this.OH MY GOODNESS. My gender is a pokemon! :O
https://mkremins.github.io/genderquiz/ (https://mkremins.github.io/genderquiz/)
Spoiler: Results! (click to show/hide)
Post by: Culise on April 27, 2017, 06:53:18 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Teneb on April 27, 2017, 07:16:32 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Wimopy on April 27, 2017, 08:00:54 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Criptfeind on April 27, 2017, 08:07:59 am
Post by: TheBiggerFish on April 27, 2017, 08:20:59 am
Post by: AzyWng on April 27, 2017, 08:44:38 am
Post by: McTraveller on April 27, 2017, 08:52:48 am
Post by: hops on April 27, 2017, 10:20:39 am
Post by: Kot on April 27, 2017, 10:29:27 am
Spoiler: I am an... (click to show/hide)
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on April 27, 2017, 10:54:22 am
I amSpoiler (click to show/hide)
Got the same thing.
Post by: Cruxador on April 27, 2017, 01:25:35 pm
Oh no! It's been more than a month since we've had a thing to Shit Let's Be! I will fix this.I took this thinking it would be more serious than it was, and I was missing a "what the fuck does that even mean" option. Apparently I'm
https://mkremins.github.io/genderquiz/ (https://mkremins.github.io/genderquiz/)
This is a highly revelatory and educational quiz, brought to us courtesy of this one nerd (https://twitter.com/maxkreminski). I simply must recommend it for everyone.Spoiler: Results (Might want to wait until you take the quiz) (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Baffler on April 27, 2017, 01:32:50 pm
Neat.
Post by: Strife26 on April 27, 2017, 02:20:36 pm
/me performs a necromantic ritual
So here's an interesting poll about who'd you be in Russia, 1917. (http://arzamas.academy/materials/1269)Spoiler: makes sense, I guess (click to show/hide)
I'm in the exact same boat.
Post by: hector13 on April 27, 2017, 02:27:11 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Da's me.
Post by: Uristides on April 27, 2017, 02:43:21 pm
Not sure if I dig the implication that I tend to nonconsensually drill into things.
Post by: helmacon on April 27, 2017, 04:01:47 pm
Quote
Your gender is: MURDER MYSTERY
{insert picture of Bendandlick Crumberrash}
Your gender is DEAD, and foul play is suspected. But the body was found in a windowless room, and the door had been locked from the inside. What's more, the police are useless! Who can possibly piece together the evidence to solve the perfect crime? This looks like a case for… BOTHERSTICK CACKLESMASH!
Post by: Solifuge on April 27, 2017, 04:06:20 pm
Post by: TempAcc on April 27, 2017, 04:14:05 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Tawa on April 27, 2017, 04:24:38 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: helmacon on April 27, 2017, 04:24:45 pm
Brother!!Yay!
I believe the correct pronoun here would be "Murderer!" though...
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 27, 2017, 06:42:15 pm
Post by: kilakan on April 28, 2017, 07:14:18 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Elephant Parade on April 28, 2017, 07:35:50 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
edit: if you answer STRONGLY DISAGREE to all questions (or maybe just the "made of x" ones), you get NULL
Post by: Baffler on April 28, 2017, 07:58:48 pm
I'm the first person on this forum to be THE MOON FROM MAJORA'S MASK, apparently. Neat!Spoiler (click to show/hide)
edit: if you answer STRONGLY DISAGREE to all questions (or maybe just the "made of x" ones), you get NULL
Excuse me sir but:
I'm the moon from Majora's Mask. My "gender approaches Termina slowly before a seemingly inevitable impact on the Final Day. Some of the people of Clock Town flee in an attempt to escape the collision, some do not believe it will fall, and others are resigned to the impending cataclysm."
Neat.
I got it when I noticed you could click submit without actually answering any of the questions. So maybe it doesn't count? Or maybe that's just another dimension of the test. These things are too esoteric for my understanding.
Post by: Spehss _ on April 28, 2017, 08:16:12 pm
Post by: misko27 on April 28, 2017, 08:47:09 pm
Post by: Tiruin on April 28, 2017, 09:28:18 pm
-snip-May be a joke in bad taste dude. :V Also that term.
Post by: wierd on April 28, 2017, 10:48:58 pm
Now, I just need to find the appropriate substrate to cultivate my spore spawn on, so that I can take over the world.
Post by: TheDarkStar on April 28, 2017, 10:50:34 pm
I wish it was 3 though
Post by: Flying Dice on April 28, 2017, 10:57:35 pm
Your gender is the natural number following 2 and preceding 4. It is prime.
Post by: Elephant Parade on April 29, 2017, 12:44:46 am
Excuse me sir but:you didn't capitalize it properlyI'm the moon from Majora's Mask. My "gender approaches Termina slowly before a seemingly inevitable impact on the Final Day. Some of the people of Clock Town flee in an attempt to escape the collision, some do not believe it will fall, and others are resigned to the impending cataclysm."
it doesn't count
Post by: Twinwolf on April 29, 2017, 07:55:15 am
Post by: heydude6 on April 29, 2017, 10:34:29 am
Post by: AzyWng on April 29, 2017, 11:02:26 am
Post by: Twinwolf on April 29, 2017, 11:09:56 am
Post by: Avis-Mergulus on April 29, 2017, 12:00:09 pm
If they were grading my performance, that's pretty low. But then again, I did confirm that I'm "all out of gender", so maybe that reflects how much gender I have left. Maybe other people have like 8.43 kilogenders or something, and I'm just sitting here with three being all like, "I maded these..."
Post by: TheDarkStar on April 29, 2017, 02:46:30 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 04:07:28 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
As fun as this has been, I am now enacting the ABOLISHMENT OF GENDER in favor of the new trendy memes that will attract better advertisers, and that's 8values (https://8values.github.io/) political quiz.
Results
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I mean, basically accurate.
Post by: Taricus on April 30, 2017, 04:36:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Welp, I'm a commie. Or a relatively benign fascist. Something along those lines anyway.
Post by: Teneb on April 30, 2017, 04:38:32 pm
Spoiler: Libertarian Socialist (click to show/hide)
Post by: wierd on April 30, 2017, 04:53:47 pm
Spoiler: Screw using images (click to show/hide)
Many of the questions were not well presented though. For many, extenuating circumstances would determine my response, while they were looking for blanket statements. I had to rely on their use of language to determine intent, to make some judgements on responses. I suspect this has tipped my scores a bit.
Post by: heydude6 on April 30, 2017, 05:03:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
((To be fair, I did have to answer neutral on a lot of questions))
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 05:03:32 pm
Post by: Gentlefish on April 30, 2017, 05:06:04 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I am honestly not surprised. I know I'm fairly radical, especially progressively.
Post by: TheDarkStar on April 30, 2017, 05:08:40 pm
Equality: 75.6% / Markets 24.4%
Diplomatic Axis: Peaceful
Nation: 30.9% / World: 69.1%
Civil Axis: Liberal
Liberty: 56.2% / Authority 43.8
Societal Axis: Progressive
Tradition: 28.2% / Progress: 71.8%
Result: Democratic Socialism
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on April 30, 2017, 05:10:22 pm
And these results do not surprise me at all tbh.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hurray for the first person to not be red in this thread.
Post by: wierd on April 30, 2017, 05:14:37 pm
I mean, take the abortion question:
Should abortion be legal?
Without question, the answer should be yes-- however, that can take a very large spectrum of implementation. It ranges from "Life saving only" to "Abortions for EVERYONE! Outpatient, no questions asked! Late term!? NO PROBLEM!"
I feel very strongly that the answer should be yes-- There *ARE* legitimate and important reasons to have it as an option-- but I am very much against "abortions of convenience." I do not believe they should be an "out" for reckless lifestyle choices. (philosophically, if feel it is dangerous and irresponsible to remove natural consequences to dangerous and unhealthy lifestyle choices. Sex is a naturally dangerous activity-- it should ALWAYS be treated as such. Much like there is no such thing as a safe cigarette, there is no such thing as safe sex. Just less dangerous sex.)
The presented options give no voice to this kind of provisional "strong agree".
To many people, my view would be strongly "traditionalist", but the metering of the system will grade it strongly "progressive."
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 05:20:45 pm
A person could answer "Disagree" to that question while thinking that abortion should be allowed in instances of, as the saying goes, "rape, incest, and protection of the mother's health" - They are against abortions in all but a couple of select categories. If they were against abortions in all cases but, say, the rare instance that the mother will definitely die if the birth goes through, then they would be justified in selecting "Strongly Disagree" instead.
It's the "percentage" of reasonable scenarios that your answer applies to that makes the difference between Neutral/Agree/Strongly Agree, in my eyes, and this works for pretty much every issue.
Post by: TempAcc on April 30, 2017, 05:24:34 pm
My gender was "FINE"
And these results do not surprise me at all tbh.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hurray for the first person to not be red in this thread.
Join me in the glory of the neoliberal brofist.
Not even gonna post my results cause they were pretty much the same tbh, except with a slightly higher tradition.
Post by: Helgoland on April 30, 2017, 05:29:12 pm
I got pretty much this - just slightly less socialist and a bit more internationalist, liberal, and progressive.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Social Liberals - unite! Ours are present, past, and future!
Post by: A Thing on April 30, 2017, 05:30:19 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Gentlefish on April 30, 2017, 05:30:38 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 05:32:00 pm
Welp, I'm a commie. Or a relatively benign fascist. Something along those lines anyway.Also, I should note - you're a commie. I say this because "fascist" is a political assignment you can get; I saw it from someone, and on a fairly liberal website too.
Hot damn, I really am a radical aren't I? I feel so alone all the way on the Left.Don't worry comrade! You've got Teneb and I to march alongside you in the light while in truth we hold you back from attaining the fullness of your godhead of Societal Progress!
Post by: AzyWng on April 30, 2017, 05:36:48 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Twinwolf on April 30, 2017, 05:37:55 pm
Post by: wierd on April 30, 2017, 05:39:15 pm
That sounds like either an "Agree" or a "Neutral", depending upon your exact limitations of "convenience". The question is if abortion should be legal, you think that abortion in many forms should be legal. No matter how strongly you support the legality, you're only supporting a fraction of abortions.
A person could answer "Disagree" to that question while thinking that abortion should be allowed in instances of, as the saying goes, "rape, incest, and protection of the mother's health" - They are against abortions in all but a couple of select categories. If they were against abortions in all cases but, say, the rare instance that the mother will definitely die if the birth goes through, then they would be justified in selecting "Strongly Disagree" instead.
It's the "percentage" of reasonable scenarios that your answer applies to that makes the difference between Neutral/Agree/Strongly Agree, in my eyes, and this works for pretty much every issue.
Since this is a tangent, I will spoilerize.
Spoiler: tangent (click to show/hide)
Post by: Teneb on April 30, 2017, 05:47:36 pm
BY MARX, SEIZE THESE CAPITALISTS!-capitalist slander--capitalism intensified-
Indeed! I'm so Red, my blood is red!Welp, I'm a commie. Or a relatively benign fascist. Something along those lines anyway.Also, I should note - you're a commie. I say this because "fascist" is a political assignment you can get; I saw it from someone, and on a fairly liberal website too.Hot damn, I really am a radical aren't I? I feel so alone all the way on the Left.Don't worry comrade! You've got Teneb and I to march alongside you in the light while in truth we hold you back from attaining the fullness of your godhead of Societal Progress!
(That's why nobles were blue-bloods. They were right-wingers.)
Post by: wierd on April 30, 2017, 05:50:25 pm
/knows it was a joke, but must state anyway.
/responds to joke properly now.
And here I thought it was because they were Reptillian Aliens in disguise!! David Icke CAN'T be wrong can he?!!
Post by: Aedel on April 30, 2017, 05:54:23 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
social liberals got nothing on me
Post by: Gentlefish on April 30, 2017, 05:56:34 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 05:57:18 pm
That sounds like either an "Agree" or a "Neutral", depending upon your exact limitations of "convenience". The question is if abortion should be legal, you think that abortion in many forms should be legal. No matter how strongly you support the legality, you're only supporting a fraction of abortions.
A person could answer "Disagree" to that question while thinking that abortion should be allowed in instances of, as the saying goes, "rape, incest, and protection of the mother's health" - They are against abortions in all but a couple of select categories. If they were against abortions in all cases but, say, the rare instance that the mother will definitely die if the birth goes through, then they would be justified in selecting "Strongly Disagree" instead.
It's the "percentage" of reasonable scenarios that your answer applies to that makes the difference between Neutral/Agree/Strongly Agree, in my eyes, and this works for pretty much every issue.
Since this is a tangent, I will spoilerize.Spoiler: tangent (click to show/hide)
Baby, this whole thread is about starting tangential lines. ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Your objection was that your viewpoint is somewhat traditionalist, but is being graded as progressive, yeah? I think that you're severely underestimating how far "traditional" can go. If the only thing about abortions you're against is on-demand abortion but would allow it in cases of, as Wikipedia classifies it "maternal life, mental health, health, rape, fetal defects, and/or socioeconomic factors", then you are still on the progressive side of the line.
Your pathos about preventing consequence-free sex is fairly traditional, yeah, but the pathos of a political position is its least important factor. There are plenty of people in the world who think that abortions should just be illegal no matter what and abortion doctors should all be killed. A good fifth of the US, a developed western nation, think that abortion should be illegal "in all cases", not even providing the typical exception of "rape, incest, and health". How's that for traditional?
Fact is, you're on the progressive side of this compared to all the more restrictive opinions out there. In fact, if that's your only quibble you could even justifiably answer "Strongly Agree". The quiz is right to assign you progressive points instead of traditional points for this question, because you are far and away from the acceptable answers to a pro-life person.
In addition, it's not about the actual composition of requests for abortion. I mean that it's about the percentage you're to one side or another in the way we discuss the issue. It's the frequency of the exceptions tacked on to the "Yes/No, but..." that virtually everyone has. And, of course, if one doesn't feel strongly enough to say basically yes or basically no, they probably should be answering Neutral.
I hold generic wireframe images of Earth closer to my heart than most people would think possible, probable, or moral.This is interesting. So far things have been going as I expected, with most people holding the economy (Social-Market) and societal issues (Traditional-Progressive) as the most important, as they usually do in general polling.
Civil and diplomatic issues are far less likely to be the most strongly felt. Would you explain why diplomatic issues are strong points to you, compared to the typical ones?
Post by: Eric Blank on April 30, 2017, 06:03:28 pm
I am literally satan to everyone who isnt me.
Post by: heydude6 on April 30, 2017, 06:10:18 pm
I am a centrist, balanced, moderate, neutral.Welcome almost brother!
I am literally satan to everyone who isnt me.
Post by: TempAcc on April 30, 2017, 06:15:13 pm
BY MARX, SEIZE THESE CAPITALISTS!-capitalist slander--capitalism intensified-
You can't stop us, you baka
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: A Thing on April 30, 2017, 06:16:35 pm
I hold generic wireframe images of Earth closer to my heart than most people would think possible, probable, or moral.This is interesting. So far things have been going as I expected, with most people holding the economy (Social-Market) and societal (Traditional-Progressive) issues as the most important, as the usually do in general polling.
Civil and diplomatic issues are far less likely to be the most strongly felt. Would you explain why diplomatic issues are a strong points to you, compared to the typical ones?
Not sure how well I can explain it, but it's mostly because I don't consider nations to be long-lasting. As far as this quiz goes this means I see expansion as something that will do more harm then good in the long run. I also consider every culture to be flawed in some way; which as far as this quiz goes means I'm not really into cultural expansion or assimilation.
Beyond that I'm not exactly keen on making absolute statements on political subjects. Probably just means I'm indecisive.
Edit: added another paragraph
Post by: wierd on April 30, 2017, 06:19:06 pm
I hold generic wireframe images of Earth closer to my heart than most people would think possible, probable, or moral.This is interesting. So far things have been going as I expected, with most people holding the economy (Social-Market) and societal issues (Traditional-Progressive) as the most important, as they usually do in general polling.
Civil and diplomatic issues are far less likely to be the most strongly felt. Would you explain why diplomatic issues are strong points to you, compared to the typical ones?
Reminds:
Diplomatic Axis: Peaceful
Nation: 35.1% / World: 64.9%
For me, the concept of Nationalism is abhorrent, and directly traceable to a plethora of ills. It is the global version of the tragedy of the commons, where every nation believes they can shit in the fishbowl, and it is their right to do so--screw those other nations, they don't count!
Since I value the commons of a habitable planet, I find the nationalistic battlecry to be like hearing rusty nails screeching down a blackboard. On the other hand, I do feel that there should be limits on what other nations are allowed to do to a country not aligned with them-- bullying is not an acceptable tactic. The problem, is that many nations want to "upset the climate" so to speak, to gain some form of social or economic advantage, to improve their power, authority, or standing-- for the purposes of self-enrichment at the deficit of all other nations and peoples. This is sociopathy to me, and I despise it. For things that do not have any real impact outside of their nation, the internal politics of that nation should not be meddled with. That is the balance I personally find ideal.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 30, 2017, 06:36:43 pm
Economic Axis: Centrist
Yeah that makes sense, I do favour a hybrid approach between state intervention, public ownership, environmental regulation and private enterprise.
Nation: 65.4%, World: 34.6%
Diplomatic Axis: Patriotic
Rather unsurprising tbh, it did ask for my opinion on the EU. My view on the importance of the UN was high, for as corrupt, inefficient and abusive as it is, it does have its role in the world. Once had an absolute chance encounter with a health minister from the UN (who had flown all the way to London to sort out his bank screwing him over an administrative error), who was very open about the inefficiency, how if 5% of the project money actually went to the project it was deemed a success. In his words, organizations like the UN are horrendous, yet they are curiously indispensable - their job could not be done by another organization. There will come a time for global institutions, and that is when individual nations are incapable of affording a foreign policy, only then will global government become the least necessary evil. That day has not yet come.
Liberty: 31.5%, Authority: 68.5%
Civil Axis: Statist
A very reluctant statist, I have found it is useless to resist state authority on a rainy socialist island when the majority of the population see no issue with it, nor see issue with it being exercised through private entities. Moreover, in the absence of state authority, people create their own, and they're usually not terribly good at it. Very much opting for the most competent of evils, the one least likely to start a civil war - though, 400 years since the last civil war was caused by the state.
Tradition: 55.2%, Progress: 44.8%
Societal Axis: Neutral
Seems right, I don't believe the two are exclusive values, and my stances tend to reflect these attempts to maintain tradition and progress. Why the need to excise one in order to have the other? It is like a seedling asking whether to cut off its shoots or its roots, it will need to cultivate both in order to survive, prosper and multiply.
Closest Match: Theocratic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theocracy) Distributism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism)
Well it's closer than the other political compass tests have gotten, which usually place me in the middle of absolute neutrality or social liberalism. I don't believe in theocracy, however I have observed that in the absence of religious institutions, people tend to form apocalyptic cults or go wild without self-restraint, two extremes I don't particularly like seeing in society. Thus neither theocracy, nor secular, but theocratic - accurate enough. Distributism is a neat idea, can't say I've heard about it before today, though it seems 19th century English Toryism was influenced a great deal by it, so it would make sense if my modern Toryish socio-economic mindset was a close enough match to distributism, myself supporting the conservative Tories faction.
Quote
According to distributists, property ownership is a fundamental right, and the means of production should be spread as widely as possible, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state socialism), a few individuals (plutocracy), or corporations (corporatocracy). Distributism, therefore, advocates a society marked by widespread property ownership.Now that's all agreeable to me, mightily fine. In the contest between socialists and capitalists I would prefer to see neither necessarily rule.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 06:56:49 pm
I pose to you the same question as I did A Thing, LW: Why are civil issues more strongly held by you than than the economy, society, and diplomacy?
Post by: DAPARROT on April 30, 2017, 07:08:32 pm
Spoiler: results (click to show/hide)
seems acuurate
Post by: Helgoland on April 30, 2017, 07:15:15 pm
And just like that, we have a civil issue supporter. I'm surprised, I was expecting we'd eventually get a minority of nationalists or internationalists for whom diplomatic issues come first, and maybe a chance of a committed internet libertarian, but I wasn't expecting anybody to have Authority be their strongest support.I can only speculate, but it might be that in the context of European politics civil issues are the area where the traditional nationalism expresses itself. Asserting superiority or starting trade wars no longer makes sense, so these convictions surface in different ways. Hell, I reckon I do the same thing from a Unionist point of view, at least when I ignore the possibility of the Union taking action on the global stage.
I pose to you the same question as I did A Thing, LW: Why are civil issues more strongly held by you than than the economy, society, and diplomacy?
Post by: misko27 on April 30, 2017, 08:13:35 pm
Spoiler: If I die, tell my wife hello (click to show/hide)
If this quiz could feel emotions, I'd expect it to be very frustrated with me. "Do you like International Institutions like the UN?" Sure. "Is your country great?" You better believe it. "What about regional organizations?" Depends. Often times my answers would flip entirely depending on specific word choice, which is the sign of hidden variables. My entire civil axis could be described by two questions: "Does the government have the right to do X?" Probably. "Should it do X?" Probably not. It's only on the progress axis that it finally forced me in one direction, and only then because it asked questions like "How do you like the science?" Even there, I'm sure I frustrated it. So I got "Liberalism" out of this.
Really, I like political axis as much as the next guy; probably more so! But it's hard to reconcile things like the diplomatic axis; if I'm an interventionist, is that Nation (going around, spreading freedom everywhere, Murica!) or World (not respecting national sovereignty, focus on human rights and the greater good?). It can be either depending on the context. That calls for an isolationism-internationalism and War vs Peace axis.
Post by: Kot on April 30, 2017, 08:54:47 pm
*angrily shakes an AK*
Post by: Gentlefish on April 30, 2017, 08:56:09 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 09:02:12 pm
Post by: TempAcc on April 30, 2017, 09:13:36 pm
commie shit snipped
I figured ye for a white army person, not a red dweeb.
HOW SHAMEFUL
Post by: Teneb on April 30, 2017, 09:15:10 pm
All of them result in Centrist. All neutral results in an exact 50/50 split on all four scales.
Post by: Gentlefish on April 30, 2017, 09:16:30 pm
For fun, I decided to answer only one option and see the results.
All of them result in Centrist. All neutral results in an exact 50/50 split on all four scales.
This is good news but unsurprising. It means it's not biased at all, at least in question phrasing.
Post by: misko27 on April 30, 2017, 09:17:09 pm
Who else is up for a White Terror? Let's show these damn commies they're not the only ones who know how to purge.
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 30, 2017, 09:35:28 pm
I pose to you the same question as I did A Thing, LW: Why are civil issues more strongly held by you than than the economy, society, and diplomacy?On issues of economics I don't want socialism or objectivism, thus I don't have any particular polarization one way or another there. Societal axis, once more I have no polarization one way or another, seeking to subvert the idea that tradition/progress is an axis in opposition. Diplomatic axis was one of the two ones really polarized held more strongly, which no doubt is a result for my steadfast desire to keep the EU off my clay, ambivalence to the UN, and support of the nation-state conducting multilateral diplomatic exchange with other nation-states, instead of unilateral exchange between few entities.
In regards to the Civil axis, why that's the most strongly held values rather than the others is interesting. To start with, the simplest way to answer that is that my opinions on civil issues were all strongly held one way or another, where in all previous ones there were questions which I sought to find the mean or was not fully enamoured with the prospect of one or another.
A more detailed breakdown would be that on issues like drugs and law enforcement, usage of violence against the state and the usage of the state to affect the people in some manner all in very clear, support one way or another.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I can only speculate, but it might be that in the context of European politics civil issues are the area where the traditional nationalism expresses itself. Asserting superiority or starting trade wars no longer makes sense, so these convictions surface in different ways. Hell, I reckon I do the same thing from a Unionist point of view, at least when I ignore the possibility of the Union taking action on the global stage.I would have thought traditional nationalism expresses itself in Europe more on diplomatic issues, most obviously showing up on nation-state organization versus continental-superstate organization? Also as an aside, do you consider the UK in the context of European politics, or something apart as those in the British isles draw distinction between the isles and the continent? I hypothesize that in European politics the reason why pan-Europeans and European nationalists favour increasing authoritarianism in response to each other is because, although one is yearning for a continental-state and another for a nation-state, both are ultimately trying to build "states" in the way Europeans have been building states - with centralized power, and always centralizing. As far as I can tell whether liberal, conservative, socialist or nationalist, all wish to centralize somewhere - only the greens occasionally buck this trend.
Post by: Baffler on April 30, 2017, 09:54:29 pm
-snip-
Our results are suspiciously similar.
Spoiler: Fuck uploading shit to imgur just for this (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on April 30, 2017, 10:13:51 pm
Our results are suspiciously similar.Wew lad, I also agree with your reasoning to boot
Post by: Tiruin on April 30, 2017, 10:52:25 pm
Hum :< So it's not just me that can't do with linking the image too.-snip-
Our results are suspiciously similar.
-snip-
Whenever someone says baka, I read it as that someone calling the other somebody, a cow.BY MARX, SEIZE THESE CAPITALISTS!-capitalist slander--capitalism intensified-
You can't stop us, you baka
Because that's language. :P
Spoiler: I got this though! (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on April 30, 2017, 10:56:50 pm
But no, politcal-axes tests by definition exclude the possibility of a person with "conflicing" ideas, painting them as neutral. Consider the wording of the middle answer: "Neutral/Unsure". Those are two very different stances. One is "I have a position, and it is either too complex or too moderate to be expressed by yes/no response", while the other is "¯\_(ツ)_/¯"
-snip-Meanwhile, I could describe the results of the majority of this forum as "more social/peaceful/liberal/progressive than I was."
I mean really, most of my results were close enough to the middle that I could call them sampling error.
Post by: Cruxador on April 30, 2017, 11:00:12 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
But I felt less like that than with most of these political tests, so I guess this is a good one.
Post by: WealthyRadish on April 30, 2017, 11:37:51 pm
Spoiler: boring samethink (click to show/hide)
I like that they alternated the orientation so not all the correct positions would be on the same side.
But really, some of the questions weren't very good. Like is "excessive government intervention bad for the economy"? Well, if it's excessive, then by definition that's too much, or "quality education is a right of all people"; I think even a 5th century Kazakh goatherd would answer yes to that.
Post by: Baffler on April 30, 2017, 11:42:16 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on April 30, 2017, 11:44:14 pm
There are plenty of people who don't think everybody deserves quality education. The political mainstream is tied to mostly supporting the existence (though not necessarily quality) of public schools because most voters are tied to them, but this quiz goes beyond the political mainstream, as we've seen from some results on here.
Even something as common as right-libertarianism would say that education isn't a right, because as a right it is funded by taxation, which is theft. Instead, schools should be private institutions which people should choose to give their wealth to, or not.
Post by: Ricky on April 30, 2017, 11:55:18 pm
I wouldnt put a lot of weight on the names they assign, they even said themselves its a work in progress. Nonetheless, I had basically the same results.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: wierd on April 30, 2017, 11:57:07 pm
Being denied access to that essential tool, because some dipshit thinks you are too dumb, is a tragedy. Understanding that education neither grants intelligence, nor assures success is vital to understanding why everyone, despite achievement levels, must be granted equal and quality access to education.
Post by: Cruxador on May 01, 2017, 12:20:40 am
I think even a 5th century Kazakh goatherd would answer yes to that.I didn't. A right is something inalienable, something that can be infringed upon at most. Something that you don't have without the intervention of other people isn't a right. It's practically advisable, but that doesn't make it a right.
Someone who disagreed might say something like "some people are stupid. They shouldn't have the right to waste the institution's time going through the motions of their inevitable failure out of a misguided sense of fair play."Since it says "quality" education, that's not valid. A quality education is appropriate to the abilities of the educated.
Post by: Urist McScoopbeard on May 01, 2017, 12:49:38 am
https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=59.1&d=71.3&g=73.8&s=82.5
Post by: WealthyRadish on May 01, 2017, 02:01:06 am
A right is something inalienable, something that can be infringed upon at most. Something that you don't have without the intervention of other people isn't a right.
There seems to be a difference of terms here, with two very different things being suggested. Are you saying that you only support "natural" rights (grounded in some universal moral authority, as opposed to statutory rights) or saying a right can strictly speaking only specify what a person or government can't do to someone (as opposed to a right guaranteeing someone something)?
It's very confusing, because the latter statement that a right can't be something that you have "without the intervention of other people" seems circular and contradicting to the point where under that requirement no rights can exist. For example under this logic I may have the natural right to my own life because I guess it's something I possess without someone giving it to me, but that doesn't mean anything if other people don't agree and participate in a societal system that intervenes to prevent people from murdering me.
Post by: feelotraveller on May 01, 2017, 02:54:18 am
95.1 Communist
93.6 Cosmopolitan
93.8 Anarchist
96.7 Revolutionary
Which for the poll would make me progress focussed, but I am more interested in the civil axis (of a progressive bent, of course). So no polling for me.
"The vote changes nothing, the struggle continues." (Another stolen slogan. ;))
Post by: Arx on May 01, 2017, 03:32:38 am
Spoiler: Dem socks, dough (click to show/hide)
Post by: misko27 on May 01, 2017, 03:35:57 am
Oi, the rest of you! Join the Neutrals! We have sensible clothing! Sometimes. We have a neutral amount of sensible and non-sensible clothing!
Post by: feelotraveller on May 01, 2017, 04:03:16 am
Sensible neutral clothing is best burnt, or cleanowned then atom-smashed. Be sure to extract any sentients first...
Post by: hops on May 01, 2017, 04:13:45 am
Post by: Haspen on May 01, 2017, 04:20:15 am
Quote
Results
Economic Axis: Social
61.6%
Diplomatic Axis: Balanced
57.4%
Civil Axis: Moderate
52.7%
Societal Axis: Progressive
64.3%
Closest Match: Social Liberalism
Well huh. I mellowed out since the days of my early 20s social authoritarian mindset :vc
Post by: hector13 on May 01, 2017, 09:23:23 am
Fair enough.
Post by: Cruxador on May 01, 2017, 11:28:37 am
A statutory right is only a "right" (in a sense that transcends specifically extant policy) as a definition or specification of a natural right. If we consider statutory rights as intrinsically relevant for the purpose of this question, then the question becomes "does your nation say that people are entitled to this" which is obviously not pertinent when we're talking about political ideals rather than just assessing our current political reality.A right is something inalienable, something that can be infringed upon at most. Something that you don't have without the intervention of other people isn't a right.
There seems to be a difference of terms here, with two very different things being suggested. Are you saying that you only support "natural" rights (grounded in some universal moral authority, as opposed to statutory rights) or saying a right can strictly speaking only specify what a person or government can't do to someone (as opposed to a right guaranteeing someone something)?
Quote
It's very confusing, because the latter statement that a right can't be something that you have "without the intervention of other people" seems circular and contradicting to the point where under that requirement no rights can exist. For example under this logic I may have the natural right to my own life because I guess it's something I possess without someone giving it to me, but that doesn't mean anything if other people don't agree and participate in a societal system that intervenes to prevent people from murdering me.Someone murdering you is in itself an intervention. In absence of that intervention, you will not be murdered, so you have a right to life which may be infringed upon by a murderer. You may also, in pretty much every country, be entitled (by statute) to protection from murder. However, this protection is not a right. There's an implied "within reason" tacked on the end. If the police show up fifteen minutes too late, your government did not commit a human rights violation. If you go out of your way to live in the mountains far away from everyone with no human contact, the expectation that someone will intervene to prevent your death becomes much less reasonable. However, the expectation that someone won't intervene to kill you doesn't change.
Post by: Glloyd on May 01, 2017, 01:24:17 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Nationalism and patriotism are a cancer, etc. etc. I feel like if I took this test ten years ago it would largely be the same, except I'd probably be a lot closer to the middle on the authority slider.
Post by: Ghazkull on May 01, 2017, 01:27:56 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Democratic Socialism, sounds about right...i really tend to veer to the left in economic question and especially Welfare question these days.
Although im rather suprised that i am moderate in terms of liberty vs. authority...
Post by: Kot on May 01, 2017, 01:29:37 pm
Nationalism and patriotism are a cancer, etc. etc.*shakes AK angrily*
Post by: WealthyRadish on May 01, 2017, 03:20:22 pm
Spoiler: Rights derail (click to show/hide)
Post by: Aedel on May 01, 2017, 04:28:20 pm
Nationalism and patriotism are a cancer
my comrade!
Post by: da_nang on May 01, 2017, 05:03:21 pm
Spoiler: Apparently, I'm a centrist (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cruxador on May 01, 2017, 06:41:25 pm
Spoiler: Apparently this discussion is being hidden now (click to show/hide)
Post by: TD1 on May 02, 2017, 03:25:48 am
Got a 4.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 02, 2017, 05:49:58 am
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/how-autistic-are-youI got a 2
Got a 4.
Post by: wierd on May 02, 2017, 06:43:30 am
But I also got a 25/30 on the sensory section. (Yes, I damned well can tell the difference in weight of a nickel and a quarter, and YES, I *can* tell the difference between brand name and knock off potato chips! >:| ) And yes, if the wiring is not installed correctly *IT DOES HUM IN THE WALLS.*
Thank gawd that CRTs arent around anymore, those things were horrid screeching demons from the netherworld.
I also got a 3/20 on the social interaction section. I have no problems reading facial expressions, but understanding what makes other people tick? Screw that noise.
The only part I seemed to score more normal on was the organization section, because damnit, I dont care about being organized, and love my clutter. :P I dont have OCD on assuring that everything is exactly where it needs to be, (unless you count orderly computer systems-- I demand perfection from things like that.)
Post by: Culise on May 02, 2017, 06:52:33 am
Post by: wierd on May 02, 2017, 07:07:23 am
Post by: hops on May 02, 2017, 07:19:06 am
Nope, I have serious issues with sensory things. I can *TASTE* red dye #40. (It's horrid, by the way. Bitter, and chemical. Blech. Ruins anything it's added to.) Can tell the difference between subtle color variations, (I do GREAT on the pantone color test btw... Hey.. lets do that next! (http://www.color-blindness.com/farnsworth-munsell-100-hue-color-vision-test/)), and other subtle differences. Most people dont give a shit about such subtle differences, so I dont advertise or freak out about them, but I can spot different manufacturing lot numbers by differences in workmanship and color.Sounds like an easy way to make money doing product tasting, though.
Post by: Tiruin on May 02, 2017, 07:21:46 am
23/14/20. And scored a 6, waaaay farther than average females.
Best talk about this in therapy sessions and otherwise in training. \o/ I meant to do that anyway before but not knowing how to word it in talking <_<
Post by: heydude6 on May 02, 2017, 07:43:39 am
My only complaints would be with the sensory perception section since I feel that the questions that were asked didn't suit the agree/disagree format very well. Do I hear electric humming in the walls? Yes, how loud is it to me? You don't know cause you didn't ask me!
Post by: Kot on May 02, 2017, 08:06:58 am
I've got 1 on final score.
I kinda feel like I'm autistic in the other direction now. The middle 7 probably comes from the fact that I am horribly inappropriate. Although, I suppose it's accurate, I was never very good at screeching.
Post by: TheDarkStar on May 02, 2017, 08:20:25 am
My overall score was 5.
Post by: AzyWng on May 02, 2017, 02:59:45 pm
Post by: helmacon on May 02, 2017, 03:19:31 pm
It gave me a 8. (around an 8.4 by the scale)
I have to admit, I was a bit surprised by the 0 in social interaction. I manage social situations rather well I think, even if I don't necessarily know what the deal is with other people all the time. Optimism goes a long way I guess.
Post by: TempAcc on May 02, 2017, 03:35:39 pm
1
I guess it was my weird fascination about the course of rivers that got me.
Post by: Teneb on May 02, 2017, 03:58:38 pm
Post by: Strife26 on May 02, 2017, 04:34:10 pm
3 Overall.
Nothing too terribly surprising, although some of those questions were iffy. Absolutes in 4 scale questions seem bad form to me.
Post by: ChairmanPoo on May 02, 2017, 04:35:37 pm
Post by: TheBiggerFish on May 02, 2017, 04:38:41 pm
Agreed. Only a sith deals in absolutes.... The irony still astounds me.
But anyway, test...
Well I just retook the thing and it's giving me a much stronger answer than before, so I'm confused what changed.
17/0/10
10 (?!)
Post by: ChairmanPoo on May 02, 2017, 04:42:06 pm
Post by: misko27 on May 02, 2017, 05:11:16 pm
The only out of bounds result were Social Interaction (which I get higher marks on than I should have for spending literal years trying to mindread people) and the ASD quotient (which was in the middle, leaning close to the average for the autistic).
Post by: Wolfhunter107 on May 02, 2017, 09:13:08 pm
Post by: misko27 on May 02, 2017, 09:32:32 pm
Post by: Eric Blank on May 02, 2017, 09:57:26 pm
Yup. :c
Post by: Cruxador on May 03, 2017, 02:15:48 am
Anyway, on to me.
8/2/6
So I'm sensorily hyposensitive (or, in common language kind of oblivious). I guess my sensory abilities are generally weak and more importantly my fucks given about my surroundings are generally low.
On social awareness, I'm worse than the typical autist. Some of that might be a result of me being hard on myself though, and seeing it as an area where I need to improve. I don't think I'm actually autism-tier in this area. Though perhaps it's merely because I can offset it with active attention and general intelligence. I dunno. I do come across as generally a bit weird and I stand out, I know that much. On the final score, I'm closer to neurotypical than to autistic. Although to me, I seem like I have a pretty broad (non-categorical) view on things, perhaps partly due to my academic interests.
Overall the test gave me a 7, which is pretty close to autistic average. Maybe I should talk to a doctor and get myself entitled to some special benefits. But there's no real need, so I'll skip the hassle for now.
Post by: Haspen on May 03, 2017, 06:10:56 am
I'm not surprised.
Post by: Loud Whispers on May 03, 2017, 10:08:22 am
I'm just questioning the reliability of a test that comes from a website called Channel 4...Channel 4 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_4)is just another British owned TV channel, like the BBC
Post by: Yoink on May 03, 2017, 12:24:40 pm
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/how-autistic-are-youI also got a 4, though some of the questions were kind of weird or somewhat unapplicable... I am quite deaf, for one thing, so I'm rarely the first to notice sounds. :P
Got a 4.
According to the 8Values test I am apparently a "centrist," which I suppose isn't surprising as my political views are pretty damn schizophrenic.
Annnnd I also did the test in the OP again, with a result of INFP. Can't exactly remember my old scores, but I'm pretty sure they were less "extreme" this time. That test always feels rather inaccurate though, as a lot of the questions would have very different answers depending on other factors at the time.
Post by: Cruxador on May 03, 2017, 12:37:55 pm
Word. I live alone, so for me if I wasn't the first one it'd be strange.http://www.channel4.com/programmes/how-autistic-are-youI also got a 4, though some of the questions were kind of weird or somewhat unapplicable... I am quite deaf, for one thing, so I'm rarely the first to notice sounds. :P
Got a 4.
Post by: WealthyRadish on May 03, 2017, 02:48:43 pm
Spoiler: Apparently this discussion is being hidden now (click to show/hide)
I figured the conversation was taking a sharp turn for the pedantic and nobody wanted to read it in this thread.
Spoiler: pedantry cont. (click to show/hide)
Post by: Cruxador on May 03, 2017, 08:36:23 pm
Spoiler: pedantry cont. (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MaximumZero on May 03, 2017, 09:12:36 pm
Equality: 87.2% / Markets 12.8%
Diplomatic Axis: Peaceful
Nation: 28.2% / World: 71.8%
Civil Axis: Liberal
Liberty: 71.2% / Authority 28.8%
Societal Axis: Revolutionary
Tradition: 7.1% / Progress: 92.9%
Result: Libertarian Socialism
Almost dead on with MSH yet again.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 03, 2017, 09:28:39 pm
Oh, except that the diplomatic axis does match exactly.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on May 25, 2017, 02:11:43 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So, as you may have heard, Donald Trump is the President. While we've covered Trump once before in the Shit Let's Be Thread, it was in the context of reflection on one's place in the brave new America, and not searching for secret psychic powers amongst the forum by predicting the future.
A group of 14 scenarios (http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/14-versions-of-trumps-presidency-from-maga-to-impeachment/) were defined in an article by Nate Thallium a few months ago, and yesterday were updated (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/we-started-with-14-possible-paths-for-trumps-presidency-which-are-most-likely-now/). I pose to you the same question from the updated chat:
Which among these scenarios do you think is the most likely to be dominant in March 2019?
Post by: SalmonGod on May 25, 2017, 02:31:40 am
Socialist: 83.5%
Internationalist: 76.1%
Libertarian: 84.6%
Very Progressive: 88.6%
Only surprise is I'm not revolutionary. I wonder what MZ did to get that. I kind of rushed through it, though, and probably interpreted some of the questions not as intended.
Post by: Cruxador on May 25, 2017, 11:03:17 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 15, 2017, 03:57:18 am
FUCKING
POLITICS
TESTS
IN [CURRENT_YEAR]
Spoiler: The last poll was a trainwreck, don't open this (click to show/hide)
Here it is, it's like the political compass but not dumb shit designed to brainwash you into thinking you should vote for Gary Johnson (http://www.politicalsextant.com/)
MY RESULTS (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=2&2=2&3=-1&4=1&5=-2&6=1&7=-1&8=-2&9=2&10=-2&11=1&12=1&13=2&14=2&16=2&17=-2&18=2&19=2&20=2&21=2&22=0&23=-1&24=1&25=2&26=-1&27=-2&28=1&29=2&30=2&31=-2&32=1&33=-1&34=0&35=1&36=2&37=-2&38=-1&39=-2) aw fuck I forgot I was pretending not to be an anarchist communist, guess the physical removal death squads are coming for me now.
Not sure what all the feminism results are about, there was only like one question on gender and I just answered "no" to "are you a misogynist asshole and/or delusional about the state of women's rights". This test may not be wholly unbiased.
I do like my worst ideologies though. "You hate people who want religion to run society, think the left and the right secretly believe the same things and are just confused without their guidance, and Ronald Reagan's entire goddamn life". Though why Reagan gets pictured for paleoconservatives instead of neoconservatives I can't imagine. Oh, there is no neoconservative. Or standard conservative.
Who the fuck made this list?
No poll for this one because
Post by: wierd on December 15, 2017, 04:24:49 am
results? (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=-1&2=1&3=2&4=1&5=1&6=1&7=2&8=-2&9=1&10=-1&11=-2&12=1&13=-1&14=2&16=1&17=1&18=1&19=1&20=0&21=2&22=1&23=-1&24=2&25=2&26=1&27=-1&28=1&29=2&30=0&31=-2&32=1&33=-2&34=1&35=2&36=-1&37=1&38=1&39=-1)
I do seem to be highly opposed to paleoconservatism, however they have that defined.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 15, 2017, 04:26:58 am
I'm getting the impression this is going to be an interesting one for the half-cocked directions it takes people's answers in.
Post by: wierd on December 15, 2017, 04:29:49 am
For instance, the "Communism is a failed idea" question. Do they mean-- Soviet communism? Do they mean-- Swedish socialism? Do they mean-- Chinese communism? Because those are all under that umbrella, BUT VERY DIFFERENT THINGS, and some of the ideas in those individual implementations are well worth further exploration, and even adoption--- just not whole hog. (Especially not russian or chinese variants!-- Swedish socialism looks very appealing, but has features that are not really compatible with the US's mainstream culture, and would thus need revision or slow adoption-- Devil in the details type things.)
Then there is all those questions harping on personal property. I take the position that shelter and security are at the base of Maslow's hierarchy of needs for very important reasons. Personal ownership confers a degree of mental safety, as one can feel secure in their physical environs at that location (even if it is just illusory)-- Take that away, and it promotes a large increase in the incidence rates of social anxiety related conditions, which is detrimental to human health, both physical and mental. Placing control over people's physical ability to have a place to stay into the hands of disconnected politicians has never ended well. For those reasons I am in favor of some form of private ownership of property, but also am in favor of legal requirements for proper stewardship of that property. (EG, you dont get to dump nuclear waste, even it if *IS* your own back yard.) This is probably why it rates me high on the "Free market" bullshit.
Post by: Gentlefish on December 15, 2017, 04:34:09 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 15, 2017, 06:35:17 am
Clerical fascism 100%
Fascist bookkeepers? Or Religious fascists?
Fascism 100%
Double fascism
Compassionate conservatism 100%
Proof George Dubwa was a double fascist
Integral nationalism 100%
Syndicalist rebels go bak 2 kaiserreich
Juche 100%
Kimmy ma boi
Paleoconservatism 100%
revive stonehenge empire
Your least matched:
Anarcho-primitivism -50%
I like this one, but don't like anarchism or lack of technology in practice and Walden is fun, if not primitivist enough
Geolibertarianism -50%
This one is a pretty sexy concept
Individualist feminism -50%
Aren't these doods just liberals
results (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=-2&2=2&3=-2&4=-2&5=-2&6=2&7=2&8=2&9=2&10=2&11=0&12=-2&13=1&14=2&16=-1&17=1&18=1&19=1&20=-2&21=-2&22=2&23=2&24=2&25=2&26=2&27=2&28=0&29=-1&30=-2&31=2&32=1&33=-2&34=-1&35=2&36=-2&37=-2&38=-2&39=2)
For many of their questions, I answered "somewhat" favored, or opposed, as I feel there are devils in details that go against going whole hog. I suspect that it graded these answers very obtusely.If you answer that communism requires division into national applications of communism, then the question has revealed you are likely on liberal-communist side of things. If you answer that communism is always going to succeed then you are comrade. If you answer that communism will always fail if implemented, then you see communism as the one common bond tying all the national failures of the USSR, China and Sweden together, and are likely on the liberal-conservative side of things
For instance, the "Communism is a failed idea" question. Do they mean-- Soviet communism? Do they mean-- Swedish socialism? Do they mean-- Chinese communism? Because those are all under that umbrella, BUT VERY DIFFERENT THINGS, and some of the ideas in those individual implementations are well worth further exploration, and even adoption--- just not whole hog. (Especially not russian or chinese variants!-- Swedish socialism looks very appealing, but has features that are not really compatible with the US's mainstream culture, and would thus need revision or slow adoption-- Devil in the details type things.)
Then there is all those questions harping on personal property. I take the position that shelter and security are at the base of Maslow's hierarchy of needs for very important reasons. Personal ownership confers a degree of mental safety, as one can feel secure in their physical environs at that location (even if it is just illusory)-- Take that away, and it promotes a large increase in the incidence rates of social anxiety related conditions, which is detrimental to human health, both physical and mental. Placing control over people's physical ability to have a place to stay into the hands of disconnected politicians has never ended well. For those reasons I am in favor of some form of private ownership of property, but also am in favor of legal requirements for proper stewardship of that property. (EG, you dont get to dump nuclear waste, even it if *IS* your own back yard.) This is probably why it rates me high on the "Free market" bullshit.But also on the counterpoint, having personal property is also the surest way to ensure an equal society will become unequal. As some people become more successful than others through natural qualities, luck and hard work, this gives them an advantage which can be leveraged to gain greater advantage. As this property is inherited, a dynasty begins to form, and before long you once more have an elite class ruling over the rest. And look at the millions of homeless in the USA, one of the wealthiest nations in the world. How did this come to be? Through the greedy actions of elite financiers, all whom are too big to jail
Post by: ChairmanPoo on December 15, 2017, 07:49:55 am
Guild socialism 88%
Kemalism 83%
Strasserism 83%
Your worst ideologies are:
Anarcho-primitivism -25%
Fusionism -29%
Paleoconservatism -40%
...hrm.... I think this is a poop test
Post by: Criptfeind on December 15, 2017, 07:50:17 am
I guess that makes sense, the ecology questions were the ones I'm most assured about.
Apparently I'm less opposed to Caliphate (-10%) then Paleoconservatism (-20%)... Sounds fair.
Post by: scriver on December 15, 2017, 08:40:52 am
I am not a Minarchist, Liberal Democrat, or a Paleolibertarian.
Meta stuff: I also answered most questions "slightly agree" or "slightly disagree". I also noticed that while most idealogies' "More information" link links to wikipedia, Minarchism links to thelibertarianrepublic.com (https://thelibertarianrepublic.com/what-is-a-minarchist-an-intro-to-the-night-watchman-state-podcast/), which on a quick look seems to be a libertarian
Post by: hector13 on December 15, 2017, 09:33:07 am
I dislike fusionism, paleoconservativ...ism? and Caliphates.
Please date me.
Results (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=1&2=1&3=1&4=2&5=-2&6=1&7=-2&8=-2&9=1&10=-1&11=-1&12=-1&13=1&14=1&16=2&17=-1&18=1&19=1&20=1&21=1&22=-2&23=-2&24=2&25=2&26=0&27=-2&28=-1&29=2&30=1&31=-2&32=1&33=-1&34=-1&35=2&36=2&37=2&38=2&39=-1).
I also answered mostly somewhat’s.
Post by: A Thing on December 15, 2017, 10:42:40 am
My top ideologies are Guild Socialism, Liberal Socialism, Social Democracy, Third Way, and Marxist Feminism. I don't know how I went from socialist/social democrat to Marxist.
I'm am apparently strongly against Anarcho-primitivism (to be fair these guys look like they skim read the good parts of ancient societies and ignored the bad parts, so yeah, I'm not a fan.) Paleoconservatism, which sounds like some sort paleontologist lobby group, and Synthesis anarchism, because screw the revolution I guess.
Results (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=-1&2=1&3=-2&4=-2&5=-1&6=1&7=1&8=-1&9=2&10=-1&11=0&12=2&13=-2&14=1&16=2&17=-1&18=2&19=1&20=1&21=2&22=0&23=-1&24=-1&25=1&26=2&27=-2&28=2&29=2&30=-2&31=0&32=1&33=-2&34=0&35=-1&36=2&37=-2&38=1&39=-1)
Also (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Guard), this is one of the ideologies you can get. Are we sure this wasn't set up by a Kaiserreich dev?
Post by: Teneb on December 15, 2017, 12:28:17 pm
Apparently I'm into Anarcha-feminism, Individualist feminism, Queer anarchism, Synthesis anarchism, and Neozapatismo. Also apparently I am not into Clerical fascism, Paleoconservatism, and Caliphates.
So four anarchisms plus some heavily regional-focused anarchism. Did I mention anarchism?
Post by: Tawa on December 15, 2017, 01:59:53 pm
I do wish there were more places to talk about this kind of stuff. All the internet communities I've found were full of Stalin-jerking tankies, uncompromising elitists, and people who think that name-calling and advocating violence is the most efficient way to establish an anarchist society.
Post by: WealthyRadish on December 15, 2017, 03:11:49 pm
Quote
Money[ambiguous] should represent hours (!) of work rather than the value (??) of the work
This question triggered me, put a warning on that.
results (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=2&2=1&3=1&4=1&5=2&6=2&7=-2&8=-2&9=1&10=-2&11=-2&12=1&13=1&14=2&16=0&17=-2&18=-1&19=2&20=2&21=1&22=-1&23=-1&24=2&25=2&26=-1&27=-2&28=1&29=2&30=2&31=-2&32=2&33=2&34=2&35=2&36=2&37=-2&38=1&39=1)
㈫㈫㈫ Anarcho-primitivism ㈫㈫㈫: 88%
㈫☮㈫ Anarcho-naturism ⚘㈫⚘: 88%
⚒⚙⚒ De Leonism ⚒⚙⚒: 90%
?⚒? Fourierism ?✝? 88%
$♲$ Free-market environmentalism $⚘$: -38%
⚾$⛪ Fusionism $⚐$: -50%
✝$⚑ Paleoconservatism $⚔⛽: -60%
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 15, 2017, 03:34:00 pm
Post by: WealthyRadish on December 15, 2017, 03:38:08 pm
Post by: Reudh on December 15, 2017, 08:56:35 pm
Best:
Baathism - (60%) (really? i don't think I align myself with Baathist thought, haha)
Free-market environmentalism - (62%)
Third Way - (62%)
Worst:
Anarchoprimitivism (-38%)
Mutualism (-38%)
Geolibertarianism (-38%)
Reading about the Third Way, it seems to be a centrist position that aims to reconcile centre right and centre left thought by adopting policies of both. Eh, I guess that matches me a bit.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 15, 2017, 09:55:36 pm
Also (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Guard), this is one of the ideologies you can get. Are we sure this wasn't set up by a Kaiserreich dev?That was exactly my thoughts
Post by: Putnam on December 15, 2017, 09:57:56 pm
Best:
Anarcho-naturism - 100%
Individualist feminism - 100%
Third Way - 100%
Worst:
Odalism - -42%
Paleoconservatism - -50%
Three principals of the people - -83%
Post by: ☼Another☼ on December 15, 2017, 10:17:13 pm
71% Liberal Socialism
75% Social Democracy
88% 'Third Way'
-33% Clerical Fascism
-33% Odalism
-40% Paleoconservatism
Post by: smjjames on December 15, 2017, 11:27:02 pm
Mine is mostly socialist, but I don't think of myself as socialist. (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=0&2=2&3=-2&4=2&5=-2&6=1&7=1&8=-2&9=2&10=-2&11=-2&12=0&13=2&14=2&16=2&17=-1&18=2&19=1&20=0&21=2&22=2&23=0&24=1&25=2&26=1&27=0&28=2&29=2&30=0&31=-2&32=1&33=0&34=0&35=0&36=2&37=-2&38=-1&39=0)
Classical Marxism: 75%
green syndicalism: 75%
guild socialism: 75%
social democracy: 75%
neozapatismosim (wiki link went to the feminism section) 75%
marxist feminism: 88%
third way (is that rand paul there?): 88%
anarcho-primitism: -25%
agorism (revolutionary market anarchism apparently): -10%
paleoconservatism (back to the stone age! jk): -30%
Post by: Arx on December 16, 2017, 12:57:21 am
Classical Marxism 75%
Guild socialism 62%
Marxist feminism 75%
I have no idea what on earth Marxist feminism is.
Anarcho-primitivism -50%
Mutualism -50%
Bleeding-heart libertarianism -62%
Geolibertarianism -50%
I have no idea what most of these are (although I can make some guesses).
Post by: Elephant Parade on December 16, 2017, 02:08:57 am
- Feminism is good, but I'm not really a fan of anarchy (and I'm not reading the Wikipedia article for Foulterism at 11 PM, lmao)
- "Fusionism" sounds much cooler than "Fourierism" and if you disagree you are bad and wrong
- I've never met a self-proclaimed "classical liberal" who actually gave a shit about modern liberal causes
I suppose it's in the name, but still
Post by: Baffler on December 16, 2017, 03:45:03 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: notquitethere on December 16, 2017, 05:24:58 am
I also got Paleoconservatism -90% which somewhat to be expected.
Post by: Haspen on December 16, 2017, 06:19:07 am
Quote
*warning* due to a sudden influx of people using this non-profit site, there have been several outages. We are looking to change our infrastructure shortly, and appreciate your patience.
Heh.
Your top ideologies are: (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=-2&2=-1&3=-1&4=1&5=-1&6=2&7=1&8=-2&9=1&10=0&11=0&12=0&13=1&14=1&16=2&17=-1&18=0&19=-1&20=0&21=0&22=0&23=1&24=1&25=2&26=2&27=0&28=0&29=2&30=1&31=-1&32=0&33=0&34=-1&35=0&36=2&37=-1&38=2&39=0)
Compassionate conservatism 67%
Kemalism 75%
Social democracy 67%
Third Way 75%
Your worst ideologies are:
Anarcho-primitivism -38%
Mutualism -50%
National-anarchism -38%
Queer anarchism -40%
Well then.
Post by: scriver on December 16, 2017, 11:02:55 am
Post by: Reudh on December 16, 2017, 11:27:31 am
To be honest, some of the questions had a lot of grey area between the choices.
Mine is mostly socialist, but I don't think of myself as socialist. (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=0&2=2&3=-2&4=2&5=-2&6=1&7=1&8=-2&9=2&10=-2&11=-2&12=0&13=2&14=2&16=2&17=-1&18=2&19=1&20=0&21=2&22=2&23=0&24=1&25=2&26=1&27=0&28=2&29=2&30=0&31=-2&32=1&33=0&34=0&35=0&36=2&37=-2&38=-1&39=0)
Classical Marxism: 75%
green syndicalism: 75%
guild socialism: 75%
social democracy: 75%
neozapatismosim (wiki link went to the feminism section) 75%
marxist feminism: 88%
third way (is that rand paul there?): 88%
anarcho-primitism: -25%
agorism (revolutionary market anarchism apparently): -10%
paleoconservatism (back to the stone age! jk): -30%
Tony Blair, nah. He was in theory a centrist british prime minister who advocated for social liberalism but economic conservatism. Fairly standard "democratic socialist", though with no radicality to it.
Post by: Haspen on December 16, 2017, 11:47:42 am
Did you agree or disagree strongly with even a single one of the answers, happen? xD
Only with those very few about government regulations ;v
Post by: smjjames on December 16, 2017, 11:58:22 am
So many Marxists. The real question though is: are my beliefs ridiculous, or is the test ridiculous? For whatever reason they seem to be all over the place. I got:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The test said I was Anarcha-feminism 100%, so I went and read some Voltairine de Cleyre. The test is good insofar as it points to actual ideologies but bad insofar as there aren't enough wedge questions. Its possible to get 100% in 11 flavours of marxism and anarchism simultaneously, for instance.
I also got Paleoconservatism -90% which somewhat to be expected.
I did note that there was a lot of grey area and ambiguousity for some questions which might have been oversimplified or there are more facets to it.
When I went to do the quiz with all of the answers as disagree for the fun of it, I got this message when I tried to submit the quiz:
"We ask for your forgiveness, but our website is down for maintenance and upgrading until the upcoming Monday.
You can still contact us using the We appreciate your understanding. "
I can't help but wonder if we caused the spike in usage, heh. Maybe we should say hi to the author of that thing.
edit2: It apparently switched to maintainence mode while I was doing the quiz I guess.
Post by: scriver on December 16, 2017, 12:03:48 pm
To be honest, some of the questions had a lot of grey area between the choices.
Mine is mostly socialist, but I don't think of myself as socialist. (http://www.politicalsextant.com/quiz/?1=0&2=2&3=-2&4=2&5=-2&6=1&7=1&8=-2&9=2&10=-2&11=-2&12=0&13=2&14=2&16=2&17=-1&18=2&19=1&20=0&21=2&22=2&23=0&24=1&25=2&26=1&27=0&28=2&29=2&30=0&31=-2&32=1&33=0&34=0&35=0&36=2&37=-2&38=-1&39=0)
Classical Marxism: 75%
green syndicalism: 75%
guild socialism: 75%
social democracy: 75%
neozapatismosim (wiki link went to the feminism section) 75%
marxist feminism: 88%
third way (is that rand paul there?): 88%
anarcho-primitism: -25%
agorism (revolutionary market anarchism apparently): -10%
paleoconservatism (back to the stone age! jk): -30%
Tony Blair, nah. He was in theory a centrist british prime minister who advocated for social liberalism but economic conservatism. Fairly standard "democratic socialist", though with no radicality to it.
Tony Blair is the picture of the neo-liberal right hiding in social democratic colours. The kind of guy who literally idealises Margaret Thatcher while claiming to be part of "Labour". They are hypocritical right-wing shills and they have been the literal death of the social democratic movement. They are the number one reason people who think Sweden is some kind of left-wing heaven are actually thinking about some hypothetical 40-years ago place that actual Sweden has been moving further and further away from during since the 70's.
Post by: smjjames on December 16, 2017, 12:28:24 pm
Post by: scriver on December 16, 2017, 01:46:48 pm
Editendum: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism)
Post by: smjjames on December 16, 2017, 05:35:06 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 16, 2017, 05:36:04 pm
Tony Blair is the picture of the neo-liberal right hiding in social democratic colours. The kind of guy who literally idealises Margaret Thatcher while claiming to be part of "Labour". They are hypocritical right-wing shills and they have been the literal death of the social democratic movement. They are the number one reason people who think Sweden is some kind of left-wing heaven are actually thinking about some hypothetical 40-years ago place that actual Sweden has been moving further and further away from during since the 70's.For clarification, Blair didn't claim to be a part of labour, he claimed to be apart from labour as new labour. Social justice is the way, not justice, and there can be a synthesis of socialism and capitalism, using a free market to deliver social justice. Thatcher and Blair had one thing in common: They are both neoliberals, though I'd say Thatcher is probably more of a proto-neoliberal where Blair was an acolyte. Otherwise I wholly agree with your assessment: I just disagree that Blair hid his ambitions, rather he told people exactly what they wanted to hear and they believed him, with his perfect focus-group crafted media control. And oh boy, were people livid when they found out just what it meant to see what they voted for implemented. It's like those people in France who voted for Macron on the basis that he'd privatise and deregulate the state, then got surprised when Macron sold and deregulated the French market and state, not aware that they had voted for exactly that.
Post by: Bumber on December 20, 2017, 06:28:31 pm
Your top ideologies are:
Classical Marxism 88%
De Leonism 80%
Guild socialism 100%
Your worst ideologies are:
Bleeding-heart libertarianism -88%
Minarchism -83%
Paleoconservatism -100%
Paleolibertarianism -83%
Questionable questions:
16. Women do not, but should, share the same rights as men
As the single question related to feminism, I feel the first part ruins it. Whether they do or not varies wildly with where you live, to say nothing of right versus opportunity.
34. We should try to limit meat and/or dairy consumption as much as possible
Not the question itself, but the pros and cons debate this on animal cruelty and environment, with fallacious arguments on both sides.
What about health effects? What if we could grow the meat in a lab? Methane-reducing algae? Should we care about fish? Dairy isn't even mentioned.
Post by: smjjames on December 20, 2017, 06:48:01 pm
Post by: ☼Another☼ on December 20, 2017, 08:05:28 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 21, 2017, 03:04:02 pm
That's why I prefer something like I Side With (https://www.isidewith.com/), but that doesn't show ideologies, is only for American Politics, and is more based on who you agree with most (in the 2016 election) because they haven't updated it (and nobody is running for anything).52% Trump, 28% Clinton, 17% Stein & 16% Johnson. Not exactly perfect cos there were some things like ObamaCare where I'd want to scrap it but replace it with an actual national health service, but there wasn't really an option for that. It also says I side most with Trump on most issues, with notable exceptions on Education where I'm aligned with Stein, Science with Clinton & Johnson and Environment with Stein again.
Post by: Teneb on December 21, 2017, 05:23:15 pm
I actually aligned with Trump on transports for whatever reason.
Post by: Rolan7 on December 21, 2017, 06:54:08 pm
Post by: ☼Another☼ on December 21, 2017, 07:50:45 pm
- Bernie Sanders
- 83%
- Democrat
- Education, Criminal, Domestic Policy, Transportation, Healthcare, Environmental, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Social, Electoral, Economic
- Hillary Clinton
- 72%
- Democrat
- Science, Education, Criminal, Environmental, Foreign Policy, Social, Electoral, Economic
- Jill Stein
- 65%
- Green
- Criminal, Domestic Policy, Healthcare, Environmental, Foreign Policy, Immigration, Social, Electoral, Economic
- Rocky De La Fuente
- 42%
- Independent
- Education, Criminal, Foreign Policy
- Gary Johnson
- 37%
- Libertarian
- Domestic Policy, Foreign Policy
- Donald Trump
- 26%
- Republican
- Science, Transportation, Social
- Darrel Castle
- 12%
- Constitution
- Foreign Policy
And I just noticed I said insurance companies should be allowed to discriminate on Pre-Existing conditions. Oh well, I'm too lazy to do this again, but I might at some point (and using Tor, so I can share my results page.)
Quick Edit: Are you guys doing all the questions and importance for each one? You don't need to, I'm just wondering.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 21, 2017, 10:08:15 pm
Post by: ☼Another☼ on December 21, 2017, 10:11:53 pm
Quote from: ISideWith
Transportation
More Important
Should the government increase spending on public transportation? Stats Discuss
Donald Trump voters: Yes
Your similar answer: Yes, and provide more free public transportation
Source (https://www.isidewith.com/elections/2016-presidential/3361740055:801556188)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 21, 2017, 10:12:32 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 21, 2017, 10:20:10 pm
It's probably because of the Magic Infrastructure Bill he wants to pass. Opinions on that don't tend to go far beyond "the road is fucked, yo" or "YOU CANNOT CUT BACK ON TAX CUTS, YOU WILL REGRET THIS", and Trump happens to advocate...well, both simultaneously, but he's given enough lip service to the former that people who don't want bridges collapsing are counted in the same box as him.I remember when enterprising anons on 4chan were considering making a political racing game. I remember it now because the proposed libertarian map was off-road racing
Post by: Paxiecrunchle on December 22, 2017, 01:55:08 am
[/quote]
May I please add that to my signature list?
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 22, 2017, 08:49:30 am
Post by: smjjames on December 22, 2017, 11:30:51 am
It's probably because of the Magic Infrastructure Bill he wants to pass. Opinions on that don't tend to go far beyond "the road is fucked, yo" or "YOU CANNOT CUT BACK ON TAX CUTS, YOU WILL REGRET THIS", and Trump happens to advocate...well, both simultaneously, but he's given enough lip service to the former that people who don't want bridges collapsing are counted in the same box as him.
Yeah, it was pretty generic and broad that it left room for people on both sides. Plus the fact that infrastructure itself generally isn't polarizing, it's how to pay for it that gets arguments started.
Post by: hector13 on December 22, 2017, 05:34:16 pm
Post by: scriver on December 23, 2017, 06:54:32 am
Post by: Tawa on February 17, 2018, 05:19:00 pm
I got this orange-red-purple Scandinavian communist thing:
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 17, 2018, 07:17:22 pm
Spoiler: It's like Cuba, but neon? (click to show/hide)
Post by: WealthyRadish on February 17, 2018, 07:31:02 pm
Spoiler: Boring usual people's republic of bay12 ilk (click to show/hide)
Post by: Enemy post on February 17, 2018, 07:42:14 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It wasn't communist though, so that's something. It was basically America but more boring.
Post by: Gentlefish on February 17, 2018, 07:43:07 pm
Spoiler: Mine was interesting to say the least. (click to show/hide)
What I find interesting was the revolution/reformism scale; Revolution absolutely has its place in my book but man should it ever be a last resort.
I also like the additional characteristics section.
E: Going back and looking, I find it odd that I have a balance between ecology and productivism. I'm very definitely pro-nature but understand the need of production. I like the space production question. That sums up my feelings pretty well. Get an economy-of-scale to space, harvest a huge-ass platinum asteroid, make massive profit.
Post by: WealthyRadish on February 17, 2018, 07:49:29 pm
☐ "I think this issue is very important"
☑ "I think this question is stupid"
Post by: Haspen on February 17, 2018, 07:50:27 pm
but apparently I have the worst flag ever.
I beg your pardon :P
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Enemy post on February 17, 2018, 07:51:07 pm
Post by: Gentlefish on February 17, 2018, 07:54:17 pm
Post by: Enemy post on February 17, 2018, 08:04:45 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
No swastikas, apparently, but I did get a note about my country blaming a specific minority for everything.
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on February 17, 2018, 09:33:36 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Sirus on February 17, 2018, 09:36:05 pm
Flag is super ugly though. (http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?j1=33&j0=26&s1=10&s0=62&e1=43&e0=26&b1=10&b0=36&m1=10&m0=55&p0=17&p1=43&c1=29&c0=29&t1=48&t0=19&femi=29&prag=100)
Post by: Powder Miner on February 17, 2018, 09:38:42 pm
[LIBERTARIANISM INTENSIFIES]
With a side of being mostly reformist and not at all revolutionist because I have faith in democratic governmental institutions and near none in revolution, not that I think revolution isn’t ever justified... I just think it very rarely works
Also damn I’m capitalist as fuck lol
Post by: smjjames on February 17, 2018, 09:41:42 pm
http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?j1=19&j0=45&s0=52&femi=24&s1=12&c1=24&c0=36&m0=5&m1=38&t1=45&e0=10&e1=48&p1=86&b0=21&b1=21
[LIBERTARIANISM INTENSIFIES]
With a side of being mostly reformist and not at all revolutionist because I have faith in democratic governmental institutions and near none in revolution, not that I think revolution isn’t ever justified... I just think it very rarely works
The color picker seems to love orange for some reason.
Post by: Powder Miner on February 17, 2018, 09:44:01 pm
Post by: smjjames on February 17, 2018, 09:44:44 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 17, 2018, 09:48:34 pm
Post by: Powder Miner on February 17, 2018, 09:51:44 pm
Post by: Tawa on February 17, 2018, 09:54:04 pm
What's this question supposed to mean: "Elections organised by the state cannot question the powers in place"?One of the poorly-worded questions I mentioned. I believe that it's saying that state-held elections will not and cannot empower people who openly distrust the government or who will bring about real change.
ninjad by msh and powder but meh
Post by: smjjames on February 17, 2018, 10:01:44 pm
http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?t1=48&t0=10&b0=31&b1=24&e1=38&e0=36&p1=10&p0=36&s0=50&s1=7&c0=26&c1=10&j0=36&j1=10&m0=29&m1=12&femi=10&prag=67
My guess what that it meant “a government’s elections can’t actually unseat the highest powers in a country” Or perhaps that elections ought not alter the fabric of the political system
That sounds like the very definition of stasis, or a one party system.
Post by: Teneb on February 17, 2018, 10:11:10 pm
Socialism - Justice - Humanity ended up being the three values under the garish nordic cross flag.
Post by: heydude6 on February 17, 2018, 10:44:39 pm
Post by: Baffler on February 17, 2018, 11:00:33 pm
http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?p0=29&p1=40&t1=26&t0=36&s1=60&j1=29&j0=33&m1=12&m0=60&e0=38&e1=21&c1=57&c0=5&b0=5&b1=52&reli=67&comp=67
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 17, 2018, 11:26:46 pm
Post by: A Thing on February 17, 2018, 11:27:53 pm
The missionary thing is accurate as far as religion being important to me is concerned, but I'm not particularly interested in the state spreading religion, whether it be mine or not.
HUMANITY - SOCIALISM - ECOLOGY sounds like a motto for the LCS or something. Also I get internationalism again, because of course I do.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 17, 2018, 11:30:16 pm
Post by: wierd on February 18, 2018, 12:41:37 am
Here's my horrible spread on that questionnaire. (http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?e0=60&e1=17&m0=83&m1=5&j0=52&j1=26&t1=36&t0=29&p1=5&p0=43&b1=21&b0=40&s1=17&s0=60&c0=19&c1=40&prag=67&femi=10)
Sadly, "Equitable eco-communist" is not a political faction in the US.
Post by: KittyTac on February 18, 2018, 01:30:23 am
Yeah, I value progress and internationalism a lot.
HUMANITY. ORDER. WORK.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 18, 2018, 01:34:07 am
Post by: Putnam on February 18, 2018, 01:45:02 am
my capitalism/communism scale is honestly baffling me
Post by: Tiruin on February 18, 2018, 01:54:53 am
Quote
Transgender individuals will never really be of the gender they would like to be.This screams 'conservative'. And not in an international way.
Sexual assaults are partly caused by men's natural impulse.
...Actually, some those conservative questions are hilariously bad. :-\
Actually most of those questions are not well done. >_>
That and those flags are broken. (http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?b1=17&b0=76&e0=50&e1=50&m0=79&m1=19&p1=14&p0=67&c0=64&femi=67&c1=21&j1=10&j0=76&t0=29&t1=45&s0=79&s1=17&prag=100) But I didn't notice the tokens at the bottom, and I'm happy with that 50/50. :P
Post by: wierd on February 18, 2018, 02:40:40 am
Tissue engineering is rapidly becoming a thing. Cultured genitals from harvested skin cells could well be a REAL thing in 20 years**. That means "Real, working genitalia for transgender people". (Going female->male might be more difficult, as they would need a donor chromosome, but they have a dad, and that is the ideal person to harvest one from. That is a very small hurdle to jump over in perspective.)
Given that they used the absurd word 'never', It is either extreme hubris, or extreme ignorance. I prefer to consider people ignorant.
**
Spoiler: A short list of articles to help explain my position here (click to show/hide)
As for the second one, I put "neutral/difficult to say". There is evidence of hereditary predisposition toward rape in chimpanzees. (Obligatory article (https://www.livescience.com/48743-aggressive-chimps-reproduce-more.html)) Humans are close evolutionary cousins of chimps, so the possibility that a specific, individual man may have a hereditary predisposition toward rape could well be true. This does not cognate that all men are rapacious sex fiends, however. They did say "Partly." There is enough grey there that I cannot just handwave it; What I can say, is that we have a very large neocortex for a reason, and that organ's function is explicitly to override the biochemistry of the limbic and endocrine systems. In other words, you need to have a serious disorder before I will accept that "Muh manliness made me do it ociffer!" is a truly legitimate answer, and that the person really was incapable of controlling themselves. (In other words, I can see it being a contributing factor, but I dont give it enough weight to reduce sentence.)
Post by: hector13 on February 18, 2018, 03:34:48 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Fuck conservatives, apparently. 93% progressivism, 7% neutral on that scale.
Tried to answer as many questions “absolutely” as possible, which explains that as well as the long bars in the other categories too.
My additional characteristics paint me as a pragmatic anarchist. A’ight.
Post by: Haspen on February 18, 2018, 04:29:44 am
So ta-da!
Spoiler: Old one (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Today (click to show/hide)
Not that much change tbh. Except that Communism/Regulationism boost.
Post by: scriver on February 18, 2018, 09:08:30 am
There were a bunch of questions I had trouble understanding. For example, the question about prisoners bring accompanied back after their sentence. Would that mean help establishing themselves, or stuff like watching over and ankle bracelets and what not?
Not to mention that I probably would have answered differently if a lot of questions were stated as less absolute.
Post by: Bumber on February 20, 2018, 02:15:00 am
Odd questions:
"Health should stay a public matter" - Healthcare? Or do everybody's illnesses need to be made public knowledge?
"One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman." - I would be rather worried if a human gave birth to a full-grown woman. Maybe it's a translation issue.
Post by: Teneb on February 20, 2018, 10:06:29 am
"One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman." - I would be rather worried if a human gave birth to a full-grown woman. Maybe it's a translation issue.Pretty sure this one is about gender identity. As in, if you took a biologically female human and everyone treated them as a man for their entire life, would they be a woman?
Post by: Baffler on February 20, 2018, 11:54:31 am
Post by: Spehss _ on February 20, 2018, 01:31:13 pm
Odd questions:I answered both of those as neutral. I figured if the question isn't clear enough for me to understand what they're asking it's not clear enough for me to accurately state my stance towards it.
"Health should stay a public matter" - Healthcare? Or do everybody's illnesses need to be made public knowledge?
"One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman." - I would be rather worried if a human gave birth to a full-grown woman. Maybe it's a translation issue.
Post by: Cruxador on February 20, 2018, 01:49:55 pm
Please comment there if you have anything to add. I omitted the bit about the de Beauvoir quote, but I'm not confident I did correctly to do so since it is a source of confusion; if I missed anything else that was an unintentional error.
As for my own results, I got a solid green flag. Not sure if this thing is insinuating that I agree with Gaddafi but since I answered far more capitalist than he would, I think that's not the case. And I very much don't prefer a permanent revolutionary government over a democratic one or over the monarchy that preceded him.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The brain at the bottom is pragmatism.
As for the results, I'm not sure how accurate they are. I don't think I'm particularly essentialist, but rather, the questions were asked in such a way that an acknowledgement that both play a role was counted as an essentialist vote. I don't recall any questions that meaningfully contrasted rehabilitative and punitive justice at all, and it may be that I picked the neutral option for each of them due to ambiguity. This is a common issue for me, but I support the notion of distinct nations within a greater international community, and it seems like most of these are designed around the notion that your nation is the only part of the world you interface with and you expect everything else to be seen through a mono-national lens. In this case, the questions were arranged such that this slanted me towards nationalism. I think the communism/capitalism is how it is because of a lack of questions dealing with the middle ground, or I'd be less skewed, and likewise would be more regulationist.
I answered both of those as neutral. I figured if the question isn't clear enough for me to understand what they're asking it's not clear enough for me to accurately state my stance towards it.I employed this methodology as well.
Post by: Gentlefish on February 20, 2018, 01:58:32 pm
Result of all strong positives:
http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?j1=50&j0=50&p1=50&p0=50&c1=50&c0=50&t0=50&t1=50&s1=50&s0=50&m1=50&m0=50&femi=43&b1=50&b0=50&mona=100&prag=100&e1=50&e0=50&reli=100&anar=100&vega=100&comp=100
Result of all strong negatives:
http://www.politiscales.net/en_US/results/?j1=50&j0=50&b0=50&b1=50&c1=50&c0=50&e1=50&e0=50&t1=50&t0=50&m1=50&m0=50&p0=50&p1=50&femi=57&s1=50&s0=50
This shouldn't be a surprise but it's completely balanced the "agree/disagree"s for a fairly neutrally posited test. The only difference is the tokens at the bottom; they all require positive responses.
Post by: A Thing on February 20, 2018, 06:36:30 pm
http://www.wyrmworld.com/interactive/camarilla/camarilla.html
I fully expect for there to be a lot of Malks here.
(https://i.imgur.com/1gTEfXd.jpg)
Post by: smjjames on February 20, 2018, 07:04:02 pm
For number 9, I chose this one: "Stare deeply into their eyes and murmur "This isn't the apartment you're looking for"" lol!
Got Tremere the first go at 43%
After trying to make things less 'treacherous', also made it more silly... Still tremere, something is weighting it heavily towards that.
Post by: Cruxador on February 20, 2018, 07:14:04 pm
So I found a Vampire the Masquerade quiz. I mean, it looks like it's from 2002Dated web design aside, there's a question involving a CD store. It also very clearly has one option per possible outcome in each question, not all of which make any sense at all. I definitely think that our standards for online quizzes should be higher these days.
I got gangrel at 43%.
Post by: Spehss _ on February 20, 2018, 07:18:11 pm
That color contrast is awful.
Post by: A Thing on February 20, 2018, 07:31:59 pm
Ventrue at 43%. No idea what that means, I'm not familiar with VTM.
That color contrast is awful.
So you're telling me you don't love edgy blood red and black? It's what's in style with all the cool vamps, dude.
Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodline's UI would likely kill you.
As for the quality of the quiz, the idea of looking for a VTM quiz just came to mind and it was the first one available. I didn't do too much investigation on the matter.
Post by: Spehss _ on February 20, 2018, 09:06:06 pm
So you're telling me you don't love edgy blood red and black? It's what's in style with all the cool vamps, dude.
Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodline's UI would likely kill you.
It gave me a feeling of nostalgia, funny enough. Reminds me of old websites from early 2000s.
Post by: Culise on February 20, 2018, 09:18:37 pm
Tremere, 54%
Post by: scriver on February 20, 2018, 09:35:43 pm
I am a monster.
Post by: Rolan7 on February 21, 2018, 12:10:09 am
(https://i.imgur.com/z4HJDfH.png)
Post by: Haspen on February 21, 2018, 12:57:13 am
Post by: notquitethere on February 21, 2018, 07:30:18 am
Post by: Tiruin on February 21, 2018, 07:52:16 am
So I found a Vampire the Masquerade quiz. I mean, it looks like it's from 2002 but I think we've done worse.
http://www.wyrmworld.com/interactive/camarilla/camarilla.html
Quote
You are sort of a...Hum ._.;
Ventrue 43 %
Your taste for the finer things in life and sense of order and honour mark you out as a Ventrue. This clan of aristocrats see it as their duty to rule and guide the Camarilla, and most (although by no means all) Kindred Princes are members of this clan.
Post by: AzyWng on February 21, 2018, 05:04:03 pm
Tremere 54 %
Your scholarly and inquisitive (yet sneaky and treacherous) nature marks you out as a Tremere. This clan was originally a group of human sorcerers who wrested the secrets of 'immortal life' from unwilling Kindred. Their magical powers make them both powerful allies and deadly foes, and many Kindred would like to see them eliminated completely.
I don't actually know anything about Vampire: The Masquerade :P
Post by: A Thing on February 21, 2018, 05:08:51 pm
Post by: DAPARROT on February 22, 2018, 11:09:03 am
pet question is biased, no birb option
Post by: Enemy post on February 22, 2018, 12:16:35 pm
The pet question was perfect, I actually would like a Doberman.
Post by: deathpunch578 on February 22, 2018, 12:45:52 pm
as a nosferatu
Post by: TD1 on February 22, 2018, 02:43:02 pm
I got Gangrel at 36%.Ditto. I actually would like an Irish Wolfhound.
The pet question was perfect, I actually would like a Doberman.
Post by: Spehss _ on February 23, 2018, 06:40:22 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on February 23, 2018, 07:37:57 pm
Spoiler: Last poll (click to show/hide)
Tremere, 32%.
Post by: Sirus on February 23, 2018, 08:08:36 pm
Post by: SalmonGod on February 24, 2018, 01:16:17 am
Post by: Teneb on February 24, 2018, 11:07:01 am
Post by: smjjames on February 24, 2018, 11:11:14 am
Probably not one of the best polls/quizzes that we've done in here.
Post by: BlackHeartKabal on February 24, 2018, 11:50:44 am
Post by: Cruxador on February 24, 2018, 12:49:12 pm
I wonder if a lot of people are selecting either 'knowledge' as the answer to the question about what value you most cherish or something, library as your favorite hangout, or books as gifts, since those seem to tilt it most towards tremere. Seems like anything other than emo results in tremere.I don't think the quiz can be blamed for that. This community always had a majority of responders getting the "insufferable nerd" option. It's probably an accurate representation of this population.
Probably not one of the best polls/quizzes that we've done in here.
Post by: Enemy post on February 24, 2018, 12:59:03 pm
Post by: MrRoboto75 on February 24, 2018, 01:01:42 pm
Seems like anything other than emo results in tremere.
Probably not one of the best polls/quizzes that we've done in here.
Vampire the Masquerade is pretty emo.
Post by: Paxiecrunchle on February 24, 2018, 08:38:45 pm
Post by: nenjin on February 24, 2018, 08:48:39 pm
Post by: ChairmanPoo on February 24, 2018, 09:38:17 pm
Post by: Cruxador on February 24, 2018, 11:36:30 pm
So, why did this thread go from a personality thread to a vampire thread?Vampirism is my personality!
Post by: deathpunch578 on February 25, 2018, 12:27:01 am
Definitely depends on players and the gm, the games I've played are basically vampires fucking around in detroitSeems like anything other than emo results in tremere.
Probably not one of the best polls/quizzes that we've done in here.
Vampire the Masquerade is pretty emo.
Post by: scriver on February 25, 2018, 04:10:21 am
I actually started playing V:tM: Bloodlines the other day. It is beautifully 90's. It's probably captured it's time better than any other work of fiction ever and I'm not even sure it wasn't unintentional on the part of the developers.
Post by: Cruxador on February 25, 2018, 04:19:16 am
"_______ fucking around" describes almost every game though. Players fuck around.Definitely depends on players and the gm, the games I've played are basically vampires fucking around in detroitSeems like anything other than emo results in tremere.
Probably not one of the best polls/quizzes that we've done in here.
Vampire the Masquerade is pretty emo.
Post by: deathpunch578 on February 25, 2018, 05:15:47 am
For some reason that WAS a lot of our games (I remember spending three 4-5 hour long sessions on trying to take an old factory and make it into a bar while also doing some drug running and having a gladatorial arena. Just three sessions of talking to npcs, buying things, and hiring people)"_______ fucking around" describes almost every game though. Players fuck around.Definitely depends on players and the gm, the games I've played are basically vampires fucking around in detroitSeems like anything other than emo results in tremere.
Probably not one of the best polls/quizzes that we've done in here.
Vampire the Masquerade is pretty emo.
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2018, 10:01:50 am
“This is too shallow” I said.
“The B12 massive won’t lower themselves to attempt this.” I said
I was wrong.
Post by: AzyWng on February 25, 2018, 11:23:24 am
Post by: hector13 on February 25, 2018, 04:37:27 pm
I need some time.
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 25, 2018, 06:32:13 pm
So, I started doing this a few days ago and stopped.You got that line of reasoning the wrong way around bruja, it is only because this is shallow that this is attempted - it's an idle fun which compromises nothing meaningful.
“This is too shallow” I said.
“The B12 massive won’t lower themselves to attempt this.” I said
I was wrong.
Tremere 54%. Sneeki breeki sorcerers are fun
Post by: Tiruin on February 25, 2018, 09:15:41 pm
I think my whole view of the world and people in it has to adjust to this.It's better than doing poorly made online 'psychological' tests which are in no way valid or reliable, and causing a ton of psychological placebo. :P At least we know what type of whatever vampire we are. At least I don't sparkle.
I need some time.
Post by: SalmonGod on February 25, 2018, 09:36:36 pm
*Dons black leather trenchcoat, turns, and adds over his shoulder...*
These tests have granted me great insight and wisdom, which aids me in my path through the darkened alleys of life. Cruel shadows lurk. Know yourself and your enemies.
*Disappears from the glow of the lone functioning streetlamp. A single crow caws somewhere nearby...*
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 25, 2018, 09:37:37 pm
nothin personel caine
Post by: TD1 on February 26, 2018, 08:22:14 am
The Lannisters send their regards
Post by: Lord_lemonpie on March 01, 2018, 04:12:19 am
Post by: scriver on March 01, 2018, 07:32:31 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on March 01, 2018, 08:26:35 am
in WoD, do you become the kind of vampire your biter was or based on your own personality, or chance?Biter, but the kind of personality you have would likely result in encountering the kinda vamps you'd be similar too wouldn't it? You're not going to meet bruja whilst climbing the corporate ladder nor nosferatu in a malkavian night club
Post by: TD1 on March 01, 2018, 08:34:40 am
*teleports behind Descan*I appear to have confused LW with Descan purely on their avatars. Ah well. C'est la vie.
The Lannisters send their regards
Post by: wierd on March 01, 2018, 11:36:57 am
Post by: AzyWng on March 01, 2018, 01:40:59 pm
I dunno what that means, though. A brief reading of the wiki on Vampire: The Masquerade reveals that these folks were former humans who specialize in thaumaturgy (blood-related magic). The group itself is quite secretive, and not too much is publicly known about them. Feared and hated by the rest of vampire society, though they do retain their uses.
I may have gotten most or all of that wrong, dunno.
Post by: hops on March 01, 2018, 09:57:17 pm
Post by: nenjin on March 02, 2018, 12:30:36 am
Post by: DeKaFu on March 02, 2018, 12:40:26 am
Is that, uh... good?
I've been telling people I want an Irish wolfhound for literally over a decade so seeing it thrown in as an answer was pretty funny.
Post by: wierd on March 02, 2018, 12:40:51 am
Blood sorcery is implicated in all kinds of shady things, including attempts at immortality. The need to keep low-key, hidden, and to avoid open confrontation would mean that there would be strong internal policing of members to prevent such things, since immortal blood sorcerers would make the vampires more than just a little uneasy, especially if said immortal blood sorcerers decide that vampire blood is a good catalyst for something.
The issue is that being small in total numbers (of necessity) makes it very hard to effectively police bad behaviors, especially those conducted in secret. There's a delicate balance between needed numbers, and needed secrecy/exclusivity.
Post by: penguinofhonor on March 27, 2018, 11:36:34 am
Tremeres 4 unlyfe
Post by: Frumple on March 27, 2018, 11:49:27 am
Post by: Rolan7 on March 27, 2018, 01:31:00 pm
Post by: TD1 on April 04, 2018, 05:55:40 am
Post by: TWO CATATA on December 23, 2018, 05:59:39 am
radiohead - just music video
ashes of crushed cities
ashes of elder things
a future with stomping of robot feet on human faces forever
geriatric haemophiles
Post by: A Thing on December 23, 2018, 11:16:16 am
I am known by the
brand of poetry
called haiku, bro
Post by: Teneb on December 23, 2018, 11:23:13 am
how software sees it - general electric agent smithHoly mackerel, Batman! A Necromancer!
radiohead - just music video
ashes of crushed cities
ashes of elder things
a future with stomping of robot feet on human faces forever
geriatric haemophiles
Sounds like it's time for a new poll. (https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2015/04/03/what-kind-of-poem-are-you/)
I am known by the
brand of poetry
called haiku, bro
a found poem.
What could that be?
I dunno.
brand of poetry
hidden away
You saw them in the mirror yesterday.
Post by: Arx on December 23, 2018, 12:34:26 pm
Post by: scriver on December 23, 2018, 01:02:58 pm
Who worked hard to come up with rhymes not bland
On he shitter he sat
While not wearing a hat
But he couldn't quite get a rhyme workan
Post by: DAPARROT on December 23, 2018, 01:59:16 pm
Post by: Enemy post on December 23, 2018, 02:21:21 pm
Post by: Doomblade187 on December 23, 2018, 02:44:48 pm
Post by: Sirus on December 23, 2018, 03:34:39 pm
to be a found poem
what even is a found poem
something
like this, I
imagine.
Post by: Teneb on December 23, 2018, 03:40:16 pm
Woe is meAs I found out with a quick search, it's either a collage made into poetry, or just accidental rhyming in texts.
to be a found poem
what even is a found poem
something
like this, I
imagine.
Post by: Bumber on December 23, 2018, 04:16:49 pm
Post by: AzyWng on December 23, 2018, 04:25:56 pm
Unfortunately, I cannot write one since that would require actual work.
Post by: Gentlefish on December 23, 2018, 05:28:20 pm
Fair, seeing as I like to write them occasionally when inspired. They're fun since you have to stick to both meter and rhyme.
I was almost afraid I was an epic.
Post by: birdy51 on December 23, 2018, 05:55:00 pm
Post by: scriver on December 23, 2018, 06:05:02 pm
Post by: Burnt Pies on December 23, 2018, 06:28:03 pm
so I can end my poem
Refridgerator
Post by: TD1 on December 23, 2018, 07:19:34 pm
I am a sonnetWe are a couplet then.
Sonnet ftw.
Post by: A Thing on December 23, 2018, 08:33:22 pm
It's interesting that so many people are found poems since very few (none?) of us even knew what they were before this.
Post by: Teneb on December 23, 2018, 09:30:09 pm
I'm throwing out a guess that MSH is an epic. I remember those short stories in the comments of Grimith's Caveman 2 Cosmos LP!Who said the random poll thread couldn't be educational?
It's interesting that so many people are found poems since very few (none?) of us even knew what they were before this.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 24, 2018, 03:47:48 pm
Sent forth to wander the fields between,
Wielding the subtlety of a feathered brick,
Beware crafty the kitchen-seller - an epic.
Post by: scriver on December 24, 2018, 04:18:35 pm
Each morning his armour he would don
He'd say to his view
In the mirror quite lewd
"I swear the codpiece alone weighs a whole ton"
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 24, 2018, 05:10:50 pm
I'm throwing out a guess that MSH is an epic.Bullseye
Post by: Cruxador on December 27, 2018, 11:51:26 pm
Post by: scriver on December 28, 2018, 07:25:29 am
I obey no metre
I am a haiku
Post by: Cruxador on December 28, 2018, 02:35:12 pm
I follow no rulesI mean, you broke syllable count in the second line. And the only reason haiku doesn't have rules for syllable stress is because of how Japanese works in the first place.
I obey no metre
I am a haiku
Post by: Rolan7 on December 28, 2018, 07:23:09 pm
Misses the point
It's snowing on mt fuji
Post by: hector13 on December 28, 2018, 07:56:30 pm
No, no no no no, no no
There is no limit
Post by: Rolan7 on December 28, 2018, 11:47:40 pm
Quote from: My housemate
YES YOU RUN WHEN CAPS LOCK IS ON
I AM GONNA GO IN TO THE GLOWING SEA SHAUUUUUNNNN!!!!!
Post by: scriver on December 29, 2018, 08:49:16 am
DICKS OUT
HAIKU KAI YAEY MOTHERFUCKER
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on January 20, 2019, 01:30:06 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
i guess (https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/personality-quiz/)
My Score:
Openness To Experience: 96
-Aesthetic Sensitivity: 100
-Intellectual Curiosity: 100
-Creative Imagination: 90
Agreeableness: 46
-Compassion: 45
-Respectfulness: 50
-Trust: 50
Conscientiousness: 58
-Organization: 75
-Productiveness: 35
-Responsibility: 65
Negative Emotionality: 54
-Anxiety: 90
-Depression: 35
-Emotional Volatility: 35
Extraversion: 42
-Sociability: 15
-Assertiveness: 25
-Energy Level: 65
Post by: scriver on January 20, 2019, 01:37:20 pm
Post by: Arx on January 20, 2019, 02:01:59 pm
Assertiveness: TWO THOUSAND uh I mean 75. My extraversion results are somewhat biased by that.
Post by: Teneb on January 20, 2019, 02:23:12 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on January 20, 2019, 02:52:50 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on January 20, 2019, 03:01:48 pm
Openness To Experience: 88
-Aesthetic Sensitivity: 70
-Intellectual Curiosity: 100
-Creative Imagination: 100
Highly open to experience, seems about right for me. Though I am guilty of spreading my interest broadly and shallowly over a million different things, I have always been open to new notions, ideas and thinking new ones. My aesthetic sensitivity must be lower than the rest because I have a few exceedingly strong aesthetic prejudices which I cannot shake from my bones. Fortunately, they do not get in the way of my intellectual or creative pursuits, nor day to day life, provided no one asks me for my opinion on glass towers.
Agreeableness: 50
-Compassion: 53
-Respectfulness: 50
-Trust: 50
Moderately agreeable. I think it's just measuring politeness more than anything, though I do always make sure to place my trust in others before judging whether I should place my trust in them. I enjoy following people when I believe they are worth following, while I possess an implacable stubbornness when it comes to the things I believe in. In other words, I am completely average in this regard.
Conscientiousness: 25
-Organization: 0
-Productiveness: 25
-Responsibility: 50
Low conscientiousness, average responsibility, abysmal organisation, misguided productivity. Seems about right, my past is full of great ideas and ambitions half finished but never completed. While my bad habits are largely gone, I haven't replaced them with good habits yet - where 2018 was a good year for developing good habits, the turn of 2019 derailed most of them.
Negative Emotionality: 54
-Anxiety: 65
-Depression: 100
-Emotional Volatility: 0
Moderate negative emotionality. I very rarely respond to high stress or high stakes situations with panic, impulsive or self-destructive decisions, being exceedingly capable of remaining focused whilst under pressure. Though it is poor for my health, I am exceedingly more productive under such high pressure working conditions than when I have free time to dispose of at my leisure. I also very rarely lose my temper, with such moments happening rarely enough that I can remember each year where I lost to wrathfulness. The maximum depression is unsurprising, I have no hope for a better tomorrow, but I am tolerant of these expectations and work to improve my odds regardless. My closest friends are aware I seek out high risk situations more out of a disregard for my own well-being than any sense of courage.
Extraversion: 21
-Sociability: 0
-Assertiveness: 50
-Energy Level: 15
I often find myself at a loss for energy, and need time to rest almost always, especially after social events. I am of average assertiveness, always willing to take charge or press my will, yet as per before I have little intrinsic desire to seek out positions of leadership. In that regards, average. Sociability scores at a 0, which is also unsurprising. I do not maintain large social networks and prefer to make few friends whom I trust absolutely. I would trust all of them with my lives, except one of them who is well-intentioned but lethally inept at common life problems - they once nearly blinded me as a result.
Overall:
Highly open to new ideas. Emotionally constant with very little influence from moods of passion. Average agreeableness, whether leading or following. Inconsistent productivity with spikes of intense productivity followed by a loss of motivation and energy. Nearly non-existent casual social life. A high disregard for personal concepts of pride, happiness or hope. An average commitment to helping others in spite of circumstances.
Post by: A Thing on January 20, 2019, 03:13:46 pm
Spoiler: Welp, looks like I'm chaotic evil (click to show/hide)
I'm not sure where the low agreeableness came from? I guess not being social=you must treat everyone like shit. I have a bad temper (which I can mostly control now) and I did select the options relevant to that, so I guess that might be it? I'unno, I went through this thing pretty quickly.
Edit: I didn't even notice it in the breakdown but apparently since I'm introverted it recommends I should go be a cowboy, because cowboys are introverted. You know what? Sure, I guess I'll go be a cowboy.
Post by: Loud Whispers on January 20, 2019, 03:32:57 pm
I got lawful neutral
Post by: A Thing on January 20, 2019, 03:40:25 pm
Post by: Teneb on January 20, 2019, 03:55:30 pm
Mk.1 Human Eyeball, slightly damaged.Fair enough.
Values on the sub-items are probably wrong if you do the math, but whatever.
Openness to Experience: 63
-Aesthetic Sensibility: 97
-Creative Imagination: 45
-Intellectual Curiosity: 63
Agreeableness: 25
-Compassion: 25
-Respectfulness: 25
-Trust: 25
Conscientiousness: 46
-Organization: 51
-Productiveness: 40
-Responsibility: 51
Negative Emotionality: 29
-Anxiety: 70
-Despression: 0
-Emotional Volatility: 25
Extraversion: 33
-Assertiveness: 52
-Energy: 40
-Sociability: 20
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd%2Fdnd%2F20001222b
I got lawful neutral
I'm the Chaotic Neutral.
Post by: Enemy post on January 20, 2019, 04:07:17 pm
Post by: TD1 on January 20, 2019, 05:07:29 pm
96 out of 100
Aesthetic sensitivity: 100
Intellectual curiosity: 100
Creative imagination: 88
Huh, first time my creativity is the lowest stat.
Agreeableness
83 out of 100
Conscientiousness
38 out of 100
Negative emotionality
42 out of 100
Extraversion
54 out of 100
After 'openness to experience' I ran out of motivation to finish working out what the figures on the graphs were. Is there an easy way to just copy paste the numbers?
Also, Lawful Neutral here.
Post by: Rolan7 on January 20, 2019, 05:16:47 pm
Post by: TD1 on January 20, 2019, 05:48:50 pm
http://easydamus.com/character.html?fbclid=IwAR3tcM0tqSn0W3qz3k1-tAjnN_L_lcP9Ym4LkoQxwjVcawf1kxFsb8_oekE
I was a Lawful Neutral Third Level Human Paladin.
All my attribute scores were 14 for some reason.
Post by: WealthyRadish on January 20, 2019, 06:22:14 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Openness To Experience: 92
-Aesthetic Sensitivity: 90
-Intellectual Curiosity: 90
-Creative Imagination: 100
Agreeableness: 46
-Compassion: 50
-Respectfulness: 50
-Trust: 45
Conscientiousness: 25
-Organization: 10
-Productiveness: 25
-Responsibility: 40
Negative Emotionality: 33
-Anxiety: 40
-Depression: 50
-Emotional Volatility: 10
Extraversion: 25
-Sociability: 0
-Assertiveness: 70
-Energy Level: 10
Got a kick out of it, at least.
Post by: A Thing on January 20, 2019, 06:45:24 pm
A fuller D&D one.
http://easydamus.com/character.html?fbclid=IwAR3tcM0tqSn0W3qz3k1-tAjnN_L_lcP9Ym4LkoQxwjVcawf1kxFsb8_oekE
I was a Lawful Neutral Third Level Human Paladin.
All my attribute scores were 14 for some reason.
I'm a neutral good Human warlock/cleric apparently.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Mephisto on January 20, 2019, 06:46:32 pm
Post by: DAPARROT on January 20, 2019, 06:51:11 pm
- Aesthetic Sensitivity:75
- Intellectual Curiosity:85
- Creative Imagination:85
- Compassion:40
- Respectfulness:50
- Trust:50
- Compassion:40
- Respectfulness:50
- Trust:50
- Anxiety:60
- Depression:40
- Emotional Volatility:60
- Sociability:10
- Assertiveness:25
- Energy Level:25
D&D one gave me True Neutral 2nd level Elf Wizard
Spoiler: alignment stuff (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: quotes (click to show/hide)
Post by: A Thing on January 20, 2019, 07:31:48 pm
Post by: Teneb on January 20, 2019, 08:08:42 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bumber on January 20, 2019, 08:32:33 pm
Aesthetic Sensitivity:70
Intellectual Curiosity:75
Creative Imagination:25
Agreeableness:42
Compassion:20
Respectfulness:50
Trust:65
Conscientiousness:33
Organization:45
Productiveness:50
Responsibility:15
Negative Emotionality:29
Anxiety:20
Depression:40
Emotional Volatility:40
Extraversion:0
Sociability:0
Assertiveness:0
Energy Level:0
The quiz seems to have mistaken my apathy for positivity. Apparently, introversion entitles me to a career in ranching, though I'm not sure how that's supposed to fulfill my intellectual curiousity.
1st D&D quiz: True Neutral
Spoiler: 2nd D&D Quiz: True Neutral Human Wizard (2nd Level) (click to show/hide)
Post by: scourge728 on January 21, 2019, 12:30:04 am
Post by: scourge728 on January 21, 2019, 12:59:09 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Criptfeind on January 21, 2019, 07:13:04 am
Post by: AzyWng on January 21, 2019, 08:33:23 pm
This is Easydamus.com's D&D Character alignment test. (http://easydamus.com/character.html)
Some questions on it include:
116. The nation is at war, your community is threatened with invasion. Do you:
Help defend it to your last breath?
Defend the area with the rest of your community?
Flee as soon as things look grim?
Cut a deal with the enemy to act as a spy?
103. Family elders are expressing disapproval of you to the rest of the family. Do you:
Accept the criticism and change your ways?
Seek a compromise with them?
Besmirch the reputation of those expressing disapproval as you ignore their scorn?
Silence them any way you can?
Meanwhile, the alignment test linked earlier has questions like these:
Your community is threatened with invasion. Do you:
Help defend it to your last breath
Man the barricades with the rest of the community
Flee as soon as things look grim
Cut a deal with the invaders to act as a spy
Family elders are expressing disapproval of you to the rest of the family. Do you:
Accept the criticism and change your ways
Seek a compromise with the elders
Besmirch the reputation of the elders as you ignore their scorn
Silence the elders any way you can
I'm going to write easydamus an email telling him about this. I dunno what'll happen, but it's worth telling him about, surely.
Post by: Rolan7 on January 21, 2019, 08:42:47 pm
Post by: Yoink on January 21, 2019, 08:49:22 pm
I just did the one in the OP, not sure if I've done it before. I didn't see anything about sub-traits, either.
I got ISTP (53%, 28%, 22%, 6%). I feel like my answers to this test would vary greatly depending on mood. Also, I gave a lot of those questions where my answer would change completely from day-to-day an "uncertain" answer, which I'm sure threw the results off considerably.
Post by: AzyWng on January 21, 2019, 09:09:20 pm
Well, I'll complete EasyDamus's one, since that has more questions and I'm doubting the nature of the one on Wizards Of The Coast.
Spoiler: Full thingie (click to show/hide)
The alignment makes sense to me. Doing what seems like a good idea is kind of my thing. I'm not really someone who would actively go out and hurt or help people unless I was influenced by something like my emotions - and even then, I usually cool down fast enough.
As for being a Wizard... Well, I'd probably be the kind that flunked schools of magic and consequentially wouldn't be all that great at it.
Post by: Yoink on January 21, 2019, 09:37:16 pm
...Fair enough. Neutral won out by a single point, heh. Also I had several ties in both class and race, not entirely sure how it determines which to go with - I guess fighter/sorc could probably be a decent combo with the right spells, though I've never played a sorcerer.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: AzyWng on January 21, 2019, 09:56:11 pm
Post by: Cruxador on January 22, 2019, 11:17:35 am
I pretty much did the opposite of all the safe things my parents tried to suggest I do with life, soooo.That's also very average though, especially during teenage years.
Post by: Teneb on January 22, 2019, 12:24:29 pm
You were the conformist all alongI pretty much did the opposite of all the safe things my parents tried to suggest I do with life, soooo.That's also very average though, especially during teenage years.
Post by: TD1 on January 22, 2019, 01:03:37 pm
Post by: Gentlefish on January 22, 2019, 01:19:36 pm
Spoiler: that darn five-thirty-eight (click to show/hide)
And all of my Conscientiousness is literally responsibility. I am not a neat person.
The mini-dnd test gave me chaotic good and I"m really not surprised.
Spoiler: complete dnd test (CG 3rd level Cleric) (click to show/hide)
Personally I'd probably have chosen Druid (the two points are close enough I'm fine fudging that result) since the outdoors are so important to me.
Post by: Kagus on January 22, 2019, 05:11:51 pm
- 27. You find it difficult to speak loudly.
- 54. You find it difficult to talk about your feelings.
...don't mind me, just finding humor in the questions and answers.
Post by: Bumber on January 22, 2019, 09:44:39 pm
As the website says, we're hardly playing our optimal builds in real life, are we?I still don't get how it thinks I have 10 charisma. Maybe because I said my face wasn't hideous?
my 25 in negative emotionality is basically 100% depression related which doesn't surprise me.Isn't a lower score better?
Post by: Gentlefish on January 22, 2019, 10:16:29 pm
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 01, 2020, 11:15:11 pm
Spoiler: Previous Results (click to show/hide)
Yes, your average Republican politician is at least a 7 or 8 on the Boomer Scale, and as such believes they are immortal until proven otherwise.
Wait, is that scale actually some people have made and reference?
Yes, in the sense that some people are just me. I suppose I could establish the Boomer Scale in full.
Someone should make an online test for how boomer you are.
Welcome back, losers. Here it is as promised, the MetalSlimeHunt Standardized Boomerism Scale (derived in part from the Hare Psychopathy Checklist). As they say, it is not the wrinkles on your face that make you a boomer, but the wrinkles in your heart. Thus this test is designed for all ages, and millennial boomers will not be spared the rising fire. The test works as follows. There are twenty statements, which you should read and indicate for each whether you Mostly Disagree, Partially Agree, or Mostly Agree. If those categories don't fully represent your answer, just pick the one which you believe represents it best.
The statements are as follows:
1. The basic facts of life are sometimes different for different generations, even those right next to each other.
2. Sometimes hard experiences make a person weaker, not stronger.
3. Modern culture and entertainment are of similar worth to what I had as a child.
4. The government is sometimes honest.
5. Parents have to give their children a complete education of the world, even if it includes some things that are against their faith.
6. A person is free to reject an apology, no matter how heartfelt, and even if they weren't really wronged.
7. There should be a an effort made to provide a basic standard of living for everybody in my country.
8. It is wrong to use corporal punishment to discipline children.
9. There is no obligation for a person to care for their parents and grandparents.
10. The occasional outburst of anger or sadness is a serious issue in a person's family relationships.
11. Society makes it necessary for people to sometimes break the law.
12. Access to modern communication technology like the internet and smartphones have become a necessary part of life.
13. It is acceptable for the government to devote extensive resources to prepare for a future crisis, even if there is a chance the crisis won't happen.
14. People ultimately have little control over the path their life takes.
15. My country should limit itself from taking actions that cause significant social or economic problems in other countries.
16. People today are obligated to make up for historical injustices, even if all the people who were involved have already died.
17. It is good for a couple who has young children to divorce once at least one of them believes the relationship can't be fixed.
18. I should try my best not to cause any trouble for the employees of a business when I am their customer.
19. People should care if some kind of law or policy makes life difficult for a very rare minority group.
20. If I am diagnosed with a disease that is almost always terminal for people of my age group, I should accept that I will die soon and focus on palliative care.
Once you have responded to all statements, add 0 points for each Mostly Agree, 1 point for each Partially Agree, and 2 points for each Mostly Disagree. This indicates your Boomerism Score out of 40.
This leads to the following categories.
0-5 points: Zoomer Gang Overlord
6-15 points: Doomed Millennial Usurper
16-20 points: Forgotten Survivor Of Gen X
21-25: Anti-Nixon Boomer
26-35: The Boomer Standard
36-40: Pro-Nuclear War Ultra-Boomer
And there you have it! Use it on yourself, your family, public figures, or whoever to determine how much of a boomer they are. Please feel free to add suggestions as to how my incredible and scientifically verified boomer test could be improved, unless you are a boomer.
Also, if you get over 35 you might be a future serial killer, just saying.
Post by: pisskop on August 01, 2020, 11:44:27 pm
Spoiler: DnD (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: dnd advanced result (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: 538 quiz (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bumber on August 01, 2020, 11:47:25 pm
Post by: A Thing on August 02, 2020, 02:45:04 am
1. The basic facts of life are sometimes different for different generations, even those right next to each other. Mostly agree
2. Sometimes hard experiences make a person weaker, not stronger. Mostly agree
3. Modern culture and entertainment are of similar worth to what I had as a child. Mostly agree
4. The government is sometimes honest. Mostly agree
5. Parents have to give their children a complete education of the world, even if it includes some things that are against their faith. Mostly agree
6. A person is free to reject an apology, no matter how heartfelt, and even if they weren't really wronged. Mostly agree
7. There should be a an effort made to provide a basic standard of living for everybody in my country. Mostly agree
8. It is wrong to use corporal punishment to discipline children. Mostly agree
9. There is no obligation for a person to care for their parents and grandparents. Mostly disagree
10. The occasional outburst of anger or sadness is a serious issue in a person's family relationships. Mostly agree? Not sure what this one is saying really.
11. Society makes it necessary for people to sometimes break the law. Mostly agree
12. Access to modern communication technology like the internet and smartphones have become a necessary part of life. Mostly agree
13. It is acceptable for the government to devote extensive resources to prepare for a future crisis, even if there is a chance the crisis won't happen. Mostly agree
14. People ultimately have little control over the path their life takes. Mostly agree
15. My country should limit itself from taking actions that cause significant social or economic problems in other countries. Mostly agree
16. People today are obligated to make up for historical injustices, even if all the people who were involved have already died. Mostly agree
17. It is good for a couple who has young children to divorce once at least one of them believes the relationship can't be fixed. Mostly agree
18. I should try my best not to cause any trouble for the employees of a business when I am their customer. Mostly agree
19. People should care if some kind of law or policy makes life difficult for a very rare minority group. Mostly agree
20. If I am diagnosed with a disease that is almost always terminal for people of my age group, I should accept that I will die soon and focus on palliative care. M E M E N T O M O R I
0-5 points: Zoomer Gang Overlord
6-15 points: Doomed Millennial Usurper
16-20 points: Forgotten Survivor Of Gen X
21-25: Anti-Nixon Boomer
26-35: The Boomer Standard
36-40: Pro-Nuclear War Ultra-Boomer
End result is 2, so I'm an ultra-zoomer I guess. Not necessarily a wrong diagnosis but I'm not sure if I qualify since I'm technically born before 9/11, which I think is the arbitrary cut-off people use? Whatever, I'm apparently anti-boomer regardless.
Post by: scriver on August 02, 2020, 03:38:07 am
Post by: Greiger on August 02, 2020, 03:40:43 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 02, 2020, 03:58:01 am
Jesus ChristThat isn't an answer, scriver.
Play my little games, scriver.
Post by: scriver on August 02, 2020, 04:19:51 am
I got a 6 though
Post by: dragdeler on August 02, 2020, 09:16:38 am
Post by: pisskop on August 02, 2020, 09:25:33 am
Appantly Im just an old-ass nixon-era boomer
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 02, 2020, 11:04:05 am
Games require a decent amount of sportsmanship, integrity, and good faith. This is just your bias hanging outNow that I dispute entirely. I am confident that this list of statements does what it purports to do, i.e., reliably rates those who have received the curse of boomerism. I don't think anyone who has boomerism would get a low score going through this list, and would probably object to everything.
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 02, 2020, 11:32:05 am
This leads to the following categories.I got 13, which puts me in DOOMER GANG
6-15 points: Doomed Millennial Usurper
All in all I would agree
Post by: Haspen on August 02, 2020, 12:56:42 pm
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on August 02, 2020, 03:34:26 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Result=ZGO
Post by: Enemy post on August 02, 2020, 03:46:34 pm
Post by: McTraveller on August 02, 2020, 03:48:07 pm
Post by: TD1 on August 02, 2020, 03:55:22 pm
Dammit I'm feeling like a dirty progressive. Someone get me boot polish, stat. And get Trudeau on the phone!
Post by: Cruxador on August 02, 2020, 10:34:05 pm
I also think my reason was different than what was designed for in
Quote
3. Modern culture and entertainment are of similar worth to what I had as a child.I think that the value of modern culture is increasing greatly by the proliferation of the internet; although it's also being hindered by the increasing corporatization of the internets and increasing engineered social limitations on internet culture, there's also an increase in available finance for creators who couldn't have made things at their current scale of operation in my own youth. But disagreeing puts me in the same category as people who say "well it was better back in my day", and although I feel that way about certain specific franchises it definitely doesn't represent my opinion overall.
Post by: Cthulhu on August 03, 2020, 07:22:09 am
1. The basic facts of life are sometimes different for different generations, even those right next to each other.
Agree
2. Sometimes hard experiences make a person weaker, not stronger.
Agree
3. Modern culture and entertainment are of similar worth to what I had as a child.
Agree, the stuff kids have today is just as shitty as what I had at that age
4. The government is sometimes honest.
Mostly disagree, lmao if you think this
5. Parents have to give their children a complete education of the world, even if it includes some things that are against their faith.
Have to? I'll still go mostly agree
6. A person is free to reject an apology, no matter how heartfelt, and even if they weren't really wronged.
Agree
7. There should be a an effort made to provide a basic standard of living for everybody in my country.
Agree, but if it comes from the government it will be used against you.
8. It is wrong to use corporal punishment to discipline children.
Agree
9. There is no obligation for a person to care for their parents and grandparents.
Agree. It would be nice, but it's not an obligation.
10. The occasional outburst of anger or sadness is a serious issue in a person's family relationships.
Disagree
11. Society makes it necessary for people to sometimes break the law.
Agree
12. Access to modern communication technology like the internet and smartphones have become a necessary part of life.
Agree
13. It is acceptable for the government to devote extensive resources to prepare for a future crisis, even if there is a chance the crisis won't happen.
Depends, but overall agree
14. People ultimately have little control over the path their life takes.
Semi-agree
15. My country should limit itself from taking actions that cause significant social or economic problems in other countries.
Agree
16. People today are obligated to make up for historical injustices, even if all the people who were involved have already died.
Agree
17. It is good for a couple who has young children to divorce once at least one of them believes the relationship can't be fixed.
Agree, do it before they're old enough to remember the fireworks
18. I should try my best not to cause any trouble for the employees of a business when I am their customer.
Agree
19. People should care if some kind of law or policy makes life difficult for a very rare minority group.
Agree
20. If I am diagnosed with a disease that is almost always terminal for people of my age group, I should accept that I will die soon and focus on palliative care.
What does this mean? What am I doing as an alternative? Going to say mostly disagree, because if this happens to me I'm going to blow myself up with dynamite
Score 6 or 8 I don't remember, Doomed Millennial Usurper
Post by: Ziusudra on August 03, 2020, 05:27:09 pm
20. If I am diagnosed with a disease that is almost always terminal for people of my age group, I should accept that I will die soon and focus on palliative care.I would say that absolutlely counts as acceptance and palliative care. Which would drop your score down to zoomer
What does this mean? What am I doing as an alternative? Going to say mostly disagree, because if this happens to me I'm going to blow myself up with dynamite
Post by: WealthyRadish on August 03, 2020, 08:36:44 pm
21. Television isn't a good news source.
22. A person feeling threatened isn't enough on its own to justify the use of lethal force.
23. Individuals voting in elections aren't usually the cause of major political change.
24. Government assistance programs aren't generally improved by adding obligations for the recipients or by adding "means testing" to exclude incomes higher than a level of poverty.
25. A person not having pride in their country doesn't discount their beliefs.
26. A person doesn't have an obligation to speak or learn the dominant language of their country of residence in order to remain there.
27. Breaking the law is sometimes a justified part of protesting.
28. Few important problems can be solved by encouraging people to change their habits or lifestyle.
29. A person's rights over their property aren't absolute, nor is that an ideal to be sought.
30. The government's stated interests overseas don't align with those of the public at large.
(I wouldn't change the rankings at all, except annihilation boomer extended to the new cap.)
Post by: Cruxador on August 03, 2020, 09:39:59 pm
Possible additions for new game+:This batch seems pretty US-centric.
21. Television isn't a good news source.
22. A person feeling threatened isn't enough on its own to justify the use of lethal force.
23. Individuals voting in elections aren't usually the cause of major political change.
24. Government assistance programs aren't generally improved by adding obligations for the recipients or by adding "means testing" to exclude incomes higher than a level of poverty.
25. A person not having pride in their country doesn't discount their beliefs.
26. A person doesn't have an obligation to speak or learn the dominant language of their country of residence in order to remain there.
27. Breaking the law is sometimes a justified part of protesting.
28. Few important problems can be solved by encouraging people to change their habits or lifestyle.
29. A person's rights over their property aren't absolute, nor is that an ideal to be sought.
30. The government's stated interests overseas don't align with those of the public at large.
(I wouldn't change the rankings at all, except annihilation boomer extended to the new cap.)
Post by: Cthulhu on August 03, 2020, 10:29:10 pm
Quote
21. Television isn't a good news source.
Agree
22. A person feeling threatened isn't enough on its own to justify the use of lethal force.
I don't think this is specific enough to answer, what does feeling threatened constitute? If someone's pointing a gun at me, I certainly feel threatened and I'm certainly justified killing that guy
23. Individuals voting in elections aren't usually the cause of major political change.
Is this a zoomer take? It's true anyway
24. Government assistance programs aren't generally improved by adding obligations for the recipients or by adding "means testing" to exclude incomes higher than a level of poverty.
Agree
25. A person not having pride in their country doesn't discount their beliefs.
Agree
26. A person doesn't have an obligation to speak or learn the dominant language of their country of residence in order to remain there.
No one has an obligation to do anything, but it's a good idea, so agree
27. Breaking the law is sometimes a justified part of protesting.
Nice try colonel
28. Few important problems can be solved by encouraging people to change their habits or lifestyle.
Agree
29. A person's rights over their property aren't absolute, nor is that an ideal to be sought.
Disagree
30. The government's stated interests overseas don't align with those of the public at large.
Agree
Post by: Rolan7 on August 03, 2020, 11:01:47 pm
1. The basic facts of life are sometimes different for different generations, even those right next to each other. Technically yes2+1+1+2+1+1=8
2. Sometimes hard experiences make a person weaker, not stronger. Technically yes
3. Modern culture and entertainment are of similar worth to what I had as a child. Agree
4. The government is sometimes honest. Mostly agree
5. Parents have to give their children a complete education of the world, even if it includes some things that are against their faith. Technically no
6. A person is free to reject an apology, no matter how heartfelt, and even if they weren't really wronged. Strongly agree, by definition IMHO
7. There should be a an effort made to provide a basic standard of living for everybody in my country. Yes, there should
8. It is wrong to use corporal punishment to discipline children. There are situations. 1
9. There is no obligation for a person to care for their parents and grandparents. I feel it every day, we can discuss its validity. ...I'm answering 1, there is some obligation but it's very conditional.
10. The occasional outburst of anger or sadness is a serious issue in a person's family relationships.It's okay, but it's serious and worth addressing. Yes.
11. Society makes it necessary for people to sometimes break the law. HAHAHA yes. More's the pity.
12. Access to modern communication technology like the internet and smartphones have become a necessary part of life. Absolutely
13. It is acceptable for the government to devote extensive resources to prepare for a future crisis, even if there is a chance the crisis won't happen. That's one of the core reasons for its existence
14. People ultimately have little control over the path their life takes. Technically no
15. My country should limit itself from taking actions that cause significant social or economic problems in other countries. Good question. 1
16. People today are obligated to make up for historical injustices, even if all the people who were involved have already died. As a community we should financially address those wrongs. Individuals are at the mercy of their parents to inherit those benefits, if they're lucky, and shouldn't be held specially accountable. So uh. 1
17. It is good for a couple who has young children to divorce once at least one of them believes the relationship can't be fixed. Emotionally agree
18. I should try my best not to cause any trouble for the employees of a business when I am their customer. I don't want any trouble. The least amount of interaction is ideal. I'm so sorry.
19. People should care if some kind of law or policy makes life difficult for a very rare minority group. Who says no to this - fuck, there are people.
20. If I am diagnosed with a disease that is almost always terminal for people of my age group, I should accept that I will die soon and focus on palliative care.Embrace me darkness
0-5 points: Zoomer Gang Overlord
6-15 points: Doomed Millennial Usurper
16-20 points: Forgotten Survivor Of Gen X
21-25: Anti-Nixon Boomer
26-35: The Boomer Standard
36-40: Pro-Nuclear War Ultra-Boomer
Doomer... yeah, about right. Though I haven't given up just yet.
Post by: Dunamisdeos on August 04, 2020, 01:52:39 pm
(https://media.tenor.com/images/c8fa5936255c865c2bf1989bea12106d/tenor.gif)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on August 04, 2020, 01:56:31 pm
I mean baby boomers are a US phenomenon.
I had a Turkish fellow tell me recently that there are boomer/millennial/zoomer dynamics in Turkey that are almost directly analogous to how they are in the US, down to boomer political irrationality focused on Erdogan in the same way US boomers are focused on Trump.
They didn't mention Xers at all, which I think only lends credibility to the claim.
Post by: Dunamisdeos on August 04, 2020, 02:12:58 pm
Where before there'd have been frustration, there's now liquid hate.
Post by: scriver on August 04, 2020, 03:08:47 pm
Post by: Egan_BW on August 04, 2020, 04:41:50 pm
2. Sometimes hard experiences make a person weaker, not stronger. 1
3. Modern culture and entertainment are of similar worth to what I had as a child. 1
4. The government is sometimes honest. 1
5. Parents have to give their children a complete education of the world, even if it includes some things that are against their faith. 0
6. A person is free to reject an apology, no matter how heartfelt, and even if they weren't really wronged. 0
7. There should be a an effort made to provide a basic standard of living for everybody in my country. 0
8. It is wrong to use corporal punishment to discipline children. 0
9. There is no obligation for a person to care for their parents and grandparents. 1
10. The occasional outburst of anger or sadness is a serious issue in a person's family relationships. 0
11. Society makes it necessary for people to sometimes break the law. 0
12. Access to modern communication technology like the internet and smartphones have become a necessary part of life. 0
13. It is acceptable for the government to devote extensive resources to prepare for a future crisis, even if there is a chance the crisis won't happen. 0
14. People ultimately have little control over the path their life takes. 0
15. My country should limit itself from taking actions that cause significant social or economic problems in other countries. 0
16. People today are obligated to make up for historical injustices, even if all the people who were involved have already died. 0
17. It is good for a couple who has young children to divorce once at least one of them believes the relationship can't be fixed. 0
18. I should try my best not to cause any trouble for the employees of a business when I am their customer. 0
19. People should care if some kind of law or policy makes life difficult for a very rare minority group. 0
20. If I am diagnosed with a disease that is almost always terminal for people of my age group, I should accept that I will die soon and focus on palliative care. 0
score 4
zoomer gang zoomer gang
Can see what you were going for with 3 but the 2000s sucked in all ways and entertainment and culture are way much better now.
Post by: Frumple on August 04, 2020, 05:30:26 pm
I think the dynamic itself is likely a near-constant in human society. I think that in our age things like social media have just used it to whip people up into a frenzied caricature of generational differences.I mean, some things are different now, too, like the literal extinction event (and functionally guaranteed literally historic-for-our-species disruptions burning their way up the pipe) we're potentially looking down the barrel of. Probably some other stuff, too, but there's a fairly major standout in "ways the previous generation has fucked/is fucking the subsequent one(s)" at the moment.
Where before there'd have been frustration, there's now liquid hate.
Post by: Cruxador on August 06, 2020, 03:03:44 pm
http://www.archetypes.com/
I got Visionary 47%, Intellectual 37% and Caregiver 16%. The description for Visionary had a focus on novelty which doesn't apply to me, but otherwise it felt accurate.
Post by: scriver on August 06, 2020, 04:33:09 pm
Post by: Ziusudra on August 06, 2020, 07:45:52 pm
Quote
Error establishing a database connection
Post by: kaenneth on August 06, 2020, 08:01:48 pm
Post by: Cruxador on August 06, 2020, 10:30:45 pm
Well that hit a wall at the second question. I don't have any friends and I'm certainly not first on anybody's list for anything.I mean, I had to fudge for that reason too.
Post by: scriver on August 07, 2020, 08:35:11 am
Edit: unfortunately I too am in the "Error establishing a database connection" archetype
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 08, 2020, 03:47:27 pm
Post by: Dunamisdeos on August 08, 2020, 03:51:30 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on August 08, 2020, 04:40:18 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 30, 2020, 02:35:07 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Enemy post on September 30, 2020, 02:45:11 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MrRoboto75 on September 30, 2020, 02:46:51 pm
super meme generalist
Post by: scriver on September 30, 2020, 02:55:20 pm
Spoiler: I am the meh (click to show/hide)
Post by: A Thing on September 30, 2020, 03:11:39 pm
I have achieved meme harmony. Only a single dot away from true radical meme centrism.
Post by: Maximum Spin on September 30, 2020, 03:16:49 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Egan_BW on September 30, 2020, 03:22:34 pm
behold your new normie overlord. until someone else scores higher I guess.
I don't frequent literally any of the sites listed for meme sources.
Post by: Dunamisdeos on September 30, 2020, 03:48:57 pm
Post by: delphonso on September 30, 2020, 08:07:37 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Bumber on September 30, 2020, 08:26:34 pm
I seem to be somewhat lacking in dankness.
Post by: pisskop on September 30, 2020, 08:48:31 pm
Spoiler: Meme (click to show/hide)
Post by: Maximum Spin on September 30, 2020, 09:27:25 pm
Post by: Rolan7 on September 30, 2020, 11:49:10 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Egan_BW on September 30, 2020, 11:52:11 pm
Post by: Rolan7 on October 01, 2020, 12:11:49 am
Spoiler: fist bamp (click to show/hide)
I'm cool with being between normie and dank. I've often felt like a bridge between worlds there. Born somewhere between boomer and millennial.
Though that age divide is vanishingly important as the new generation gains prominence.
Post by: Egan_BW on October 01, 2020, 12:14:42 am
Born somewhere between boomer and millennial.
B-between boomer and millenial? What could you even call that age group!? Do any such people exist? O_O
Post by: scriver on October 01, 2020, 12:17:22 am
Post by: Rolan7 on October 01, 2020, 12:22:01 am
Post by: Egan_BW on October 01, 2020, 12:25:56 am
Post by: Rolan7 on October 01, 2020, 12:29:34 am
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 01, 2020, 12:53:38 am
We don't need to name any generations after the zoomers, so it's fine that z is the last letter. The zoomers will be the last generation to live to adulthood, so it's actually quite appropriate.
Also, I'm not making any thread title change to recognize the horror LW has brought upon my once-glorious polling thread.
Post by: scriver on October 01, 2020, 01:44:35 am
This is off topic but have you ever noticed how there aren't any letters in the english alphabet after Z?
Truly this the Maya 2014 apocalypse of our age
Post by: wierd on October 01, 2020, 02:51:22 am
Like this one
Æ
People just routinely misspell it. Such as Æon-- which they (mis)spell as Aeon.
In the past, it even had such funny things as the "Long S" (similar to, but distinct from German ß)-- ſ.
Post by: pisskop on October 01, 2020, 02:55:11 am
Æ lmao
Post by: Bumber on October 01, 2020, 04:05:48 am
(I suspect the answer is "yes".)
Post by: scriver on October 01, 2020, 04:35:59 am
Also iirc ſ is just how they used to write S back in medieval calligraphy. You can trust me on this, I took a high school calligraphy course I don't remember much from
Post by: wierd on October 01, 2020, 06:25:22 am
see also, how "Congress" is spelled on the bill of rights.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3d/Long-s-US-Bill-of-Rights.jpg)
Post by: dragdeler on October 01, 2020, 06:42:22 am
Post by: scriver on October 01, 2020, 10:58:06 am
Yes I'm using the German sign because phone
Just pretend it's the f s
Post by: A Thing on October 01, 2020, 11:05:20 am
Also, I'm not making any thread title change to recognize the horror LW has brought upon my once-glorious polling thread.
LW is just giving the people what they want MSH. When there are no official polls, the unofficial becomes official.
Post by: Maximum Spin on October 01, 2020, 11:19:52 am
(BTW, ſ isn't a ligature. A ligature is two or more letters bound together, like ß or ff or even fl.)
Post by: A_Curious_Cat on October 01, 2020, 11:32:18 am
But do we use thorn or eth?
(I suspect the answer is "yes".)
Before the printing press, thorn (uppercase "Þ", lowercase "þ") was used to represent the voiceless dental fricative (the "th" in "then", "thin" and "think").
Eth (uppercase "ᴆ", lowercase "ð") was used to represent the voiced dental fricative (the "th" in "bathe" and "lathe").
Æ isn't a different letter from AE. Just like VV isn't a different letter from W.
Also iirc ſ is just how they used to write S back in medieval calligraphy. You can trust me on this, I took a high school calligraphy course I don't remember much from
Aesc (uppercase "ᴁ", lowercase "æ") was used to used to represent the near-open front unrounded vowel (the "a" in "bat", "cat", and "ash").
Post by: scriver on October 01, 2020, 11:46:35 am
Also, I'm not making any thread title change to recognize the horror LW has brought upon my once-glorious polling thread.
LW is just giving the people what they want MSH. When there are no official polls, the unofficial becomes official.
The name already fits it anyway ;)
Post by: Cruxador on October 01, 2020, 12:22:48 pm
shit, let's be cringe (http://memecompass.com/)I feel like the creator of this poll had quite a shallow understanding of the subject matter, which strongly hinders the value of the thing. Also, every example "meme" was shit.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I got 2.21, 2.37 for what little it's worth.
I also don't search for memes, I feel like anyone who does is drastically missing the point.
On a rather annoyingly approrpriate note,
We don't need to name any generations after the zoomers, so it's fine that z is the last letter. The zoomers will be the last generation to live to adulthood, so it's actually quite appropriate.Explaining a joke only kills it. People who didn't get it to begin with gain nothing from you having done so.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 01, 2020, 12:40:28 pm
Post by: A Thing on October 01, 2020, 01:00:24 pm
Post by: Egan_BW on October 01, 2020, 01:10:21 pm
Post by: hector13 on October 01, 2020, 09:09:31 pm
I'll only accept a monarch who's from north carolina.
Adam Leroy Lane?
Or John Cocke, but they missed a trick by not naming him Richard.
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 02, 2020, 03:36:41 pm
Also, I'm not making any thread title change to recognize the horror LW has brought upon my once-glorious polling thread.Peace offering: shit let's be American voters (https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz)
I gotta say I was disappointed I couldn't say "I disagree with Obamacare, the government should provide public healthcare for all free of charge with a national insurance model," eliminating the need for battling insurance middlemen entirely
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: A Thing on October 02, 2020, 04:27:15 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: hector13 on October 02, 2020, 04:29:04 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Bit of a lefty.
“Left is Right!” was my fave slogan in LCS.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 02, 2020, 04:39:21 pm
Peace offering: shit let's be American voters (https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz)fuckin
Quote
I gotta say I was disappointed I couldn't say "I disagree with Obamacare, the government should provide public healthcare for all free of charge with a national insurance model," eliminating the need for battling insurance middlemen entirely
National single-payer is pretty much this, because the single-payer in question is the US government. The distinction is academic at that point.
Spoiler: Boomer Results (click to show/hide)
95% socialist
94% green
92% peace and freedom
89% democratic
89% transhumanist
55% libertarian
22% constitution
17% republican
I'm sure you're all just shocked by my results.
Post by: A Thing on October 02, 2020, 04:49:42 pm
Also I'm less of a republican than MSH, I'm not sure what that means.
Post by: WealthyRadish on October 02, 2020, 04:51:28 pm
Code: [Select]
95% Green
95% Socialist
92% Democratic
92% Peace and Freedom
87% Transhumanist
23% Libertarian
1% Constitution
0% Republican
MSH confirmed repub
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 02, 2020, 04:54:07 pm
But it's probably because I support gun rights and I'm skeptical of government authority on a few issues that the Republicans claim to be too. Unlike the GOP, I just actually believe that skepticism, and the people who I want to have gun rights are minorities.
Post by: A Thing on October 02, 2020, 04:59:26 pm
Post by: RedKing on October 02, 2020, 05:07:52 pm
I'm still waiting for someone to get transhumanist as their top pick.We need Descan in here, that should do it.
EDIT:
90% democratic
89% green
89% socialist
86% peace and freedom
81% transhumanist
14% lolbertarian
2% republican
2% constitution
Post by: Egan_BW on October 02, 2020, 05:12:51 pm
I'm still waiting for someone to get transhumanist as their top pick.https://youtu.be/dvnZwzUTuj0
Post by: hector13 on October 02, 2020, 05:17:47 pm
That's right, I'm 17% an American NazBol.
But it's probably because I support gun rights...
Colour me surprised!
...and the people who I want to have gun rights are minorities.
Colour me less surprised!
Post by: Maximum Spin on October 02, 2020, 05:19:27 pm
and the people who I want to have gun rights are minorities.This is funny to me because that's one of my most important issues! See, we're not so different after all. :P
Post by: pisskop on October 02, 2020, 06:30:54 pm
Spoiler: No surprises here, a centrist with an interest in more concise government (click to show/hide)
Post by: delphonso on October 02, 2020, 06:58:05 pm
I'm still waiting for someone to get transhumanist as their top pick.
I was close.
92 Green
91 Democrat
91 Transhumanist
90 Socialist
89 Peace and Freedom
37 Libertarian
10 Constitution
4 Republican
Post by: A Thing on October 02, 2020, 07:09:10 pm
Post by: Eric Blank on October 02, 2020, 08:09:46 pm
My results;
85% green
85% transhumanist
84% democratic
84% peace and freedom
81% socialist
17% libertarian
10% Republican
9% constitution
I only did 22 questions though
Post by: Egan_BW on October 02, 2020, 08:12:56 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on October 02, 2020, 08:24:13 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 02, 2020, 08:29:37 pm
Post by: Bumber on October 02, 2020, 08:32:29 pm
73% Transhumanist
68% Green
68% Socialist
68% Peace and Freedom
65% Republican
52% Constitution
50% Libertarian
I've always considered my political stance complicated, and this just confirms it.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 02, 2020, 08:34:02 pm
The prophecy lies unbroken.Correct, timeclone.
Post by: delphonso on October 02, 2020, 08:34:38 pm
The wording of the poll confused me and I voted libertarian, because I dislike the libertarians.
I did literally the exact same thing.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 02, 2020, 08:37:57 pm
Post by: A Thing on October 02, 2020, 08:39:09 pm
Post by: RedKing on October 02, 2020, 09:00:49 pm
even in this confused fake democracy where the points aren't real and the rules don't matter the democrats get low voter turnout.Well yeah....democrats are the "socks with sandals" of political parties. Sure, they might be inoffensive for the most part and even comfortable in private, but they're embarrassing as fuck in public.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 02, 2020, 09:03:52 pm
Post by: dragdeler on October 02, 2020, 10:33:24 pm
Post by: Dostoevsky on October 02, 2020, 10:33:43 pm
91 Green
91 Socialist
90 Transhumanist
90 Peace and Freedom
89 Democratic
49 Libertarian
26 Republican
25 Constitution
Gotta say more than a few of the questions didn't really have great answers, though.
Post by: dragdeler on October 02, 2020, 10:42:11 pm
Post by: Frumple on October 02, 2020, 11:26:38 pm
93% Green
92% Peace and Freedom
91% Democratic
90% Transhumanist
49% Libertarian
16% Republican
16% Constitution
Yeah, that... isn't a surprise, save maybe that it seems to be suggesting peace and freedom and transhumanist are actual political parties. If they are I hadn't noticed :V
Post by: scriver on October 03, 2020, 07:36:18 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
So did anyone else get to the question of "What attributes do you want to see in a president" in the end and just select the lot of them?
Post by: wierd on October 03, 2020, 08:26:39 am
So, where do go to get my fancy new synthetic body?
Post by: delphonso on October 03, 2020, 08:40:40 am
Post by: Egan_BW on October 03, 2020, 09:07:34 am
I selected none of them, because they're all meaningless buzzwords at this point.
So did anyone else get to the question of "What attributes do you want to see in a president" in the end and just select the lot of them?
Post by: SalmonGod on October 03, 2020, 09:43:41 am
94% Green
92% Peace and Freedom
89% Transhumanist
88% Democratic
48% Libertarian
21% Constitution
15% Republican
Pretty sure I'd heard of the Peace and Freedom Party before, but not a Transhumanist Party
Post by: scriver on October 03, 2020, 09:51:01 am
I selected none of them, because they're all meaningless buzzwords at this point.
So did anyone else get to the question of "What attributes do you want to see in a president" in the end and just select the lot of them?
"Fashion sense" was my favourite
Post by: pisskop on October 04, 2020, 07:50:17 am
Spoiler: No surprises here, a centrist with an interest in more concise government (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: I answered (most) of the questions (click to show/hide)
So I redid the test, answered most of the questions. A lot of it is mired in things I admittedly dont know enough about, such as the state of the estate tax and how I should feel about it, or the intricacies of immigration. I mean, I know _what_ the estate tax is, and _how_ _much_ it is, but I dont know how it affects government spending or income when compared to the other options. I have very broad understanding of what people say or think about whether states should set their own border policies, but not really the numbers or informed data to pour over and say 'why yes, this is the right answer'.
I feel like a lot of people will kneejerk answers out that wont make practical sense, which makes it even more frustrating to me. Ive always felt like a major disadvantage of the dichotomic is that people are less informed over the details of their affiliated parties.
Maybe Im over-thinking this though. Maybe I am just 'too smart for my own good', as some at my workplace have suggested...
Post by: A Thing on October 04, 2020, 11:05:13 am
I selected none of them, because they're all meaningless buzzwords at this point.
So did anyone else get to the question of "What attributes do you want to see in a president" in the end and just select the lot of them?
"Fashion sense" was my favourite
"They can do horrid shit just look fashionable while doing it."
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 04, 2020, 07:54:07 pm
"They can do horrid shit just look fashionable while doing it."How else would Nazism make a comeback
Post by: MorleyDev on October 04, 2020, 08:58:26 pm
96% - Democratic
96% - Green
96% - Socialist
94% - Women’s Equality
93% - Peace and Freedom
92% - Transhumanist
33% - Libertarian
3% - Constitution
1% - Republican
1 whole percentage Republican? I feel dirty. Apparantly Republicans are also pro mandatory vaccination of children?
Also I continue to find it utterly fucking horrifying that things like "Should teachers carry guns" is even a political topic in the USA. Like seriously, what the actual fuck guys?
Post by: wierd on October 04, 2020, 09:13:55 pm
As somebody that sees idiots abuse medical exemptions for bullshit reasons (that simply translate to "it makes my butt hurt to have to get vaccinated!"), I totally get why you would want to clamp that shit down tight. The situation with the measles epidemic and pals, rightly needs to get shut down.
However, I also strongly remember *EVERY GODDAMN YEAR* I was in public school as a kid, the school administration would "DISCOVER!!" that I had not received all of my early childhood immunizations, then just have their goddamn brains shut off and fail to continue reading *WHY*. Long and sordid story cut short: My early childhood immunity shots nearly fucking killed me. Left me with neurological damage in my left eye, that took years of retraining to correct. I was fucking lucky as hell that is *ALL* it did-- considering I experienced grand-mal siezures, and a deadly-high fever as a consequence of the adverse reaction. A good portion of the people who do experience these rare reactions end up mentally retarded, wheelchair bound, or worse.
Now then-- When somebody has a fucking *REAL* medical reason not to immunize, Please don't roll your eyes at it, M'kay? Please dont promulgate the falsehood that every child must always 100% be immunized, no exceptions. I realize that it's tempting in the face of the doucheholes that abuse medical exemption; but medical exemption exists for a reason. Clamping down politically only would have made it impossible for me to attend school at all, rather than requiring (YET A FUCKING AGAIN) my family to bury the school administration under documented history of life threatening adverse reaction. (which they seemed to conveniently misplace every year.)
Considering how often I was literally harassed by the school system over this as a child, and how much WORSE it is now, when I see "Mandatory Immunizations! RAAAA!!" as a political point, I get triggered.
I am not anti-vaxx; Vaccination is very safe, and very effective. That does not mean it is 100% safe, and for those people that DO INDEED have a history of adverse reactions, going full retard because that's what it says on the paper, is how you get people killed.
Thx, Bai.
Post by: MorleyDev on October 04, 2020, 09:35:49 pm
Speaking as a Brit with a nationalised health service and all that where a medical exception would come from an actual state-paid-for GP, and where seeking vaccination currently isn't a legal requirement and just a thing that decent parents do, so this may be a cultural clash in terms of understanding what the term 'mandatory vaccination' is taken to mean. I meant it as "a parent can't choose not to vaccinate a child, that decision must be made by a doctor".
The reason it should be mandatory for everyone else is in part because it protects those people who medically can't and are thus vulnerable after all :)
My point was that given their general 'less state involvement', 'mah freedoms' stance, it was surprising to me that the Republican opinion wouldn't be that "vaccination is a personal choice and shouldn't be required on the grounds of something something freedom".
Post by: SalmonGod on October 04, 2020, 10:16:28 pm
By all means, mock stupid anti-vaxxers all you want. I resent them forcing the issue to the point of mandate being a real political question. But once authoritarianism is advanced for any reason, it can't be walked back without sacrifice, and it won't always be on your side.
Post by: wierd on October 04, 2020, 10:24:26 pm
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2553651/
Basically, because people in the US are *ALSO* infamously fucking stupid, at least as it relates to religion and the like, exemption was permitted for bullshit reasons, while people with real reasons often got given the run-around. Again, the "We require all students to be vaccinated before they can enroll" is a bureaucrat's wet dream. It leads to the kind of situation I was mentioning, where we would have to drop doctor's orders on the fuckers *EVERY MOTHERFUCKING YEAR*, then have a day-long consultation with the school administration that -- YES-- I have not magically been given a brand new body that is no longer sensitized to the vaccine-- and thus, NO, *CANNOT TAKE IT*, and *YES*, there *IS* doctor's credentials behind this-- with the school administrations getting progressively more and more white knuckled as they have to back away from the comfort zone they have of 100% compliance with the "as written" requirements.
(which they would then promptly forget about/conveniently lose, just in time for enrollment next year.)
When I see "Mandatory vaccination", I see this bureaucratic bullshit writ large.
This is because the primary driver for such things, is legal absolvement. Specifically, the requirement is less about keeping students safe, and more about keeping various institutions absolved from legal culpability, which is why it becomes a fucking nightmare, where actually asserting the medical exemption becomes a lesson in futility, as the bureaucrats devise ever-more-onerous means of attempting to reach 100% "exactly as written on paper" compliance.
See for instance, the following "nightmare scenario"--
Student who cannot be vaccinated against measles, catches measles, and ends up spreading it at school. Angry mothers DEMAND to know why the school permitted an unvaccinated student there. School has to defend the decision to permit a student who cannot medically be vaccinated to receive an education, in the face of angry mothers who had their kids get sick, and more importantly, their bloodsucking lawyers.
If you throw into that mix actual LAWS requiring vaccinations, then you end up with it getting much much worse for the people who cannot vaccinate.
Post by: MorleyDev on October 04, 2020, 10:38:15 pm
Their are multiple large public schools within easy public travel distance from each other (in addition to being split into four separate schools entirely for diferent ages), so the parents and school system can easily ensure that few-to-none non-vaccinated children share schools/class groups.
You should see about 95% of the population vaccinated, so spreading the unvaccinated children out is something schools should do anyway, reducing risks. Any legal case would get laughed out of court unless you could demonstrate gross negligence from the school and that'd be national news and found by review by Ofsted or similar long before the courts even got involved.
As do SGs topic of abuses, I'm hessitant to give much credit to the slippery slope argument. The issue there is just a same need for oversight you always need with any organisation. So long as you have the required involvement of the national licensing board of doctors that have the required independence from the state itself and the open public forum you manage that risk and keep the precedence of it being for independently verified medically neccesary reasons. As is often the case, the dangers of any organisation (state or business) are a lack of integrated checks and balances built around open oversight. When they want to do things behind close doors is when you should start getting nervous.
Post by: wierd on October 04, 2020, 10:53:30 pm
Because that would get in the way of EPIC PROFITS on the part of medical insurance companies, and would eliminate arbitrary pricing for materials and procedures at hospitals (which is used to help ameliorate the impact of providing care to people who cannot pay), that simply does not exist in the USA.
It's all lawyers and bureaucrats all the way down. (and where its not compliance bureaucrats, it's the accounting kind, which are just as bad, if not worse.)
Post by: SalmonGod on October 05, 2020, 01:24:12 am
And this isn't slippery slope alarmism. It's reality in the USA. What I described is exactly what happens to our checks and balances and oversights. Plus, times when forcing medical horrors on minorities was considered good science in the public interest are still in living memory, such as sterilization or lobotomy of LGBT people. Horrors which wouldn't have happened so readily if institutions and people of the time had greater respect for bodily autonomy than they did for what was considered expert wisdom in science and public interest. Protecting core principles should always override solving immediate problems.
Post by: MorleyDev on October 05, 2020, 03:40:29 am
There's a clear line of difference that can be drawn between 'vaccinations' and 'forced sterilisation' so I don't think equating them as one-opening-the-door-to-the other is in itself a useful concern. Though there are definitely certain powers I think should be excluded from the state on principle, being able to execute your own citizens for example, but 'complete bodily autonomy' isn't one I count as a current core principle any more than 'complete financial autonomy' (since taxes exist, the state has a right to some of your money). The state already has a claim to your body, the argument is just in how much.
Heck, if given a referendum on the subject I'd vote to remove the ability for people to opt-out of organ donation so that may indicate where on that line I fall anyway. But I'd also decriminalise the taking of illegal drugs, but that's less "The state has no right to tell you what you can and can't put in your body" and more "Criminlising addicts doesn't really help the addicts" and "Some illegal drugs just aren't illegal for a good reason anyway".
The USA system of checks/balances is also one I find a bit weird to be honest, being based more around pitting 3 branches of government in direct opposition to each other and hoping that none of them ever 'win' the resulting conflict rather than setting up actually independent bodies of oversight. It's closer to the Holy Roman Empire Pope/Emporer structure, where Pope could crown Emporer could install Bishops could select Pope, and that didn't work very well then either.
There are a few USA systems that at a glance almost seem like they were based on a misunderstanding of older systems, like how the USA president has legal powers comparable to those of the British monarch but without the centuries of tradition/president that made them never actually get used even back when the presidency was founded. In practice the British monarch can't actually use their power of veto, whilst the US precident can and does.
Post by: Bumber on October 05, 2020, 04:10:34 am
See for instance, the following "nightmare scenario"--
Student who cannot be vaccinated against measles, catches measles, and ends up spreading it at school. Angry mothers DEMAND to know why the school permitted an unvaccinated student there. School has to defend the decision to permit a student who cannot medically be vaccinated to receive an education, in the face of angry mothers who had their kids get sick, and more importantly, their bloodsucking lawyers.
Wait, how does it spread if everyone else is supposedly vaccinated?
Post by: MorleyDev on October 05, 2020, 04:14:20 am
The success rate of MMR is 99% after two doses, meaning for a school with 300 children at attendence and a 95% vaccination rate an 'outbreak' could statistically be expected to infect at most the 15 non-vaccinated children and 2-3 vaccinated children. Not accounting for transmission rate of the virus itself and assuming 100% there, though for Measles that isn't far off (it's got a ridiculously high 90% transmission rate, highest of any known virus. That high rate is why you need at least 95% of the population to be vaccinated against it, any less than that and it becomes capable of spreading).
So in this scenario you have one unvaccinated child that gets infected, one very unlucky vaccinated child whose body didn't develop the correct immune response, one stupid mother, and one lawyer who gets to use the term "force majeure" severe illness
Post by: wierd on October 05, 2020, 06:22:25 am
See for instance, the following "nightmare scenario"--
Student who cannot be vaccinated against measles, catches measles, and ends up spreading it at school. Angry mothers DEMAND to know why the school permitted an unvaccinated student there. School has to defend the decision to permit a student who cannot medically be vaccinated to receive an education, in the face of angry mothers who had their kids get sick, and more importantly, their bloodsucking lawyers.
Wait, how does it spread if everyone else is supposedly vaccinated?
Vaccines do not confer 100% immunity yo. They increase your body's ability to recognize a pathogen, and respond aggressively to it, but if you get deluged under viral particles, it's not 100%. Measles is very contagious, and likes to cling to surfaces. So, if you have active shared space with somebody that has it, immunization just puts you into the realm of "you might not catch it" instead of "Fuck bruh, you gonna get dem measles yo."
A person who is not vaccinated, with an open and active infection, is gonna be dropping virus like a rapper making it rain at a club.
Post by: delphonso on October 05, 2020, 06:49:11 am
Edit: I just said what wierd said - I'm useless here. Also I didn't get vaccinated until I was like 20.
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 05, 2020, 07:33:25 am
Also I continue to find it utterly fucking horrifying that things like "Should teachers carry guns" is even a political topic in the USA. Like seriously, what the actual fuck guys?Teachers should only be allowed to stand at arms with a 6 pounder cannon, 8 pounder at the most. How else will they be able to drill teamwork into their students if they carry only a sidearm
Regarding vaccines, just about everyone in my school was vaccinated against chicken pox except me. Whilst chicken pox vaccines aren't mandatory in UK schools they are given out to people in close contact with anyone who had chicken pox. Given that there had been a bout of chicken pox in my school which resulted in my sister and mother catching chicken pox, to this day I have no idea why I never got the vaccine. Glorious british bureaucracy works in wonderful ways
Post by: Bralbaard on October 05, 2020, 01:39:33 pm
94% SocialistI like how almost every forum member is a green socialist hipie. Until we boot up DF that is. There we rob the first elven caravan, proceed to burn the surface world with magma, and send any migrants we dislike to the atom smasher.
93% Green
92% Peace and Freedom
91% Democratic
90% Transhumanist
49% Libertarian
16% Republican
16% Constitution
Yeah, that... isn't a surprise, save maybe that it seems to be suggesting peace and freedom and transhumanist are actual political parties. If they are I hadn't noticed :V
Post by: A Thing on October 05, 2020, 02:40:48 pm
Post by: thompson on October 05, 2020, 02:50:17 pm
94% SocialistI like how almost every forum member is a green socialist hipie. Until we boot up DF that is. There we rob the first elven caravan, proceed to burn the surface world with magma, and send any migrants we dislike to the atom smasher.
93% Green
92% Peace and Freedom
91% Democratic
90% Transhumanist
49% Libertarian
16% Republican
16% Constitution
Yeah, that... isn't a surprise, save maybe that it seems to be suggesting peace and freedom and transhumanist are actual political parties. If they are I hadn't noticed :V
No contradiction at all. Hitler self-identified as a socialist, was big on environmental policy, was anti-war (before obtaining power, at least), and had his own vision of transhumanism. He also did the real-world equivalents of all those horrible DF activities you mentioned. Incidentally, he was pro big-state and didn’t have much respect for the constitution, so the profile is a dead match.
Moral of the story: politics is complex.
Fake edit: Please note I’m not seriously comparing anyone on this forum to Hitler, just musing about the apparent contradictions of political ideology.
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 05, 2020, 02:58:40 pm
The Nazis were not socialist or antiwar by any description, and they were bankrolled by private capital interests which dictated their policies. That is fact, not opinion.
Post by: Nordlicht on October 05, 2020, 03:09:32 pm
Also most dictators are pro big-state.
Post by: thompson on October 05, 2020, 03:11:56 pm
If you think that I of all people am going to tolerate lying about the ideology of the Nazis in my own thread, you're sorely mistaken.
The Nazis were not socialist or antiwar by any description, and they were bankrolled by private capital interests which dictated their policies. That is fact, not opinion.
You should brush up your knowledge of Hitler’s public messaging. He most certainly claimed to be all those things, repeatedly, in a big way. It was all a ruse, of course, but that’s precisely the point. I did say “self-identifies”, did I not?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on October 05, 2020, 03:33:58 pm
Post by: thompson on October 05, 2020, 03:47:33 pm
The broader problem with politics is that people are very strongly influenced by social connections and their own self concept. A moderate conservative can easily be led astray by a dishonest demagogue masquerading as a conservative. The same is true for faux left wing demagogues too, of course.
All in all, I don’t think you can ever trust how a person describes their politics. What they choose to omit is often more important.
Post by: Maximum Spin on October 05, 2020, 03:48:33 pm
If you call changing words to be what you want them to be "self-identifies".Isn't that exactly what that means?
Post by: Doomblade187 on October 05, 2020, 03:58:35 pm
Maybe, but that doesn't mean other people have to recognize them as such.If you call changing words to be what you want them to be "self-identifies".Isn't that exactly what that means?
Post by: thompson on October 05, 2020, 04:11:59 pm
I “should” just do the sensible thing and change my ways, but I’m not sure I’ve got it in me...
Post by: scriver on October 05, 2020, 04:40:25 pm
Maybe, but that doesn't mean other people have to recognize them as such.If you call changing words to be what you want them to be "self-identifies".Isn't that exactly what that means?
Unfortunately people not recognising them as socialists is a problem faced by socialists across the spectra ;)
There were socialist elements that were part of the Nazi movement, but Hitler had all their leaders and ideologues murdered or exiled during the Night of Long Knives along with many of his other rivals within the party.
Post by: thompson on October 05, 2020, 05:18:04 pm
The problem is that there are too many definitions of the word, while most people with no academic understanding of it jump to the de-facto “similar time other countries that self-identify as such” definition. I’ve made a point about trying to redefine the movement under a new term that eliminates these misunderstanding, but apparently semantic purity is more important.Maybe, but that doesn't mean other people have to recognize them as such.If you call changing words to be what you want them to be "self-identifies".Isn't that exactly what that means?
Unfortunately people not recognising them as socialists is a problem faced by socialists across the spectra ;)
Post by: hector13 on October 05, 2020, 06:51:06 pm
Post by: wierd on October 05, 2020, 06:55:48 pm
I am sure Nintendo would sue, but it still sounds hilarious.
Post by: pisskop on October 05, 2020, 06:59:47 pm
You know what was really good? JoeJoe Rabbit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL4McUzXfFI&ab_channel=SearchlightPictures
Very good stuff.
Post by: scriver on October 06, 2020, 04:35:25 am
did you just call me hitler sunshine
You are my sunshine
My hitler sunshine
Post by: martinuzz on October 06, 2020, 04:37:34 am
Post by: Frumple on October 06, 2020, 08:48:48 am
I mean, day before yesterday, in a game I've been playing recently I murdered hundreds of people trying to defend their home from an invading force, and hundreds more trying to rebel against a totalitarian criminal gang that seized the local government.94% SocialistI like how almost every forum member is a green socialist hipie. Until we boot up DF that is. There we rob the first elven caravan, proceed to burn the surface world with magma, and send any migrants we dislike to the atom smasher.
93% Green
92% Peace and Freedom
91% Democratic
90% Transhumanist
49% Libertarian
16% Republican
16% Constitution
Yeah, that... isn't a surprise, save maybe that it seems to be suggesting peace and freedom and transhumanist are actual political parties. If they are I hadn't noticed :V
These are not things I'd do, recommend, encourage, or accept as reasonable in real life, under most any circumstances. A game is, in fact, a game, and not only is there nothing unusual or contradictory in holding beliefs and to behaviors at odds with those incentivized in games, I'd hope to every fucking hell imaginable most people would hold beliefs and to behaviors at odds with the omnicidally sociopathic horseshit games tend to reward :P
... that said, I think the actual worst I've ever done in DF was way back in the day I lined an entire map (except the road in) with serrated disk traps. Migrating animals kept getting their feet chopped off, which was pretty unkind. Never really got into the world flooding, caravan ransacking, migrant squishing stuff, though.
Post by: MorleyDev on October 06, 2020, 09:19:54 am
Post by: Dostoevsky on October 06, 2020, 10:17:40 am
Despite there being a reputation of all DF players as heartless genociders I wouldn't be surprised if there were far more quiet fort-builders than atom-smashing megalomaniacs.
Post by: Eric Blank on October 06, 2020, 11:57:36 am
Post by: Sirus on October 06, 2020, 03:28:49 pm
Not that I don't cut loose and unleash my dickish side at times, but it really depends on the game and it's always the exception rather than the rule.
Post by: MaximumZero on October 06, 2020, 11:44:28 pm
Post by: scriver on October 07, 2020, 03:52:48 am
Also o remember Halfway Haus
Post by: wierd on October 07, 2020, 03:55:29 am
Post by: Dostoevsky on October 07, 2020, 12:41:50 pm
Ain't much room for socialism or transhumanism in 1066 Europe.
Post by: Maximum Spin on October 07, 2020, 12:48:57 pm
Ain't much room for socialism or transhumanism in 1066 Europe.Counterpoint: there was more room for transhumanism as an ideology in 1066 Europe, where people had less scientific awareness of what ways of transcending human limitations are actually possible (eg, any religion which aspires to apotheosis, including the Cathars, is essentially transhumanist), and you can in fact play as a transhumanist in CK2 in many ways, but being a transhumanist is entirely compatible with being a jerk and arguably encourages it.
Post by: RedKing on October 07, 2020, 12:51:34 pm
Well ck is a "fill the entire hierarchy of the world with near-genetic-copies of yourself" simulator after allI thought that was Endless Space, when playing the Horatio.
Post by: Dostoevsky on October 07, 2020, 01:15:33 pm
Counterpoint: there was more room for transhumanism as an ideology in 1066 Europe, where people had less scientific awareness of what ways of transcending human limitations are actually possible (eg, any religion which aspires to apotheosis, including the Cathars, is essentially transhumanist), and you can in fact play as a transhumanist in CK2 in many ways, but being a transhumanist is entirely compatible with being a jerk and arguably encourages it.
Fair point, especially considering the supernatural stuff vanilla CK2 includes.
(Also fair point on being a transhumanist and jerk not being incompatible.)
Post by: MaximumZero on October 08, 2020, 01:12:08 am
Well ck is a "fill the entire hierarchy of the world with near-genetic-copies of yourself" simulator after allI miss the Halfway Haus. :(
Also o remember Halfway Haus
Post by: scriver on October 08, 2020, 07:31:15 am
Post by: Rolan7 on October 08, 2020, 09:18:11 am
(Also fair point on being a transhumanist and jerk not being incompatible.)"Baby I can change! I'm going to be better!"
"You'll stop cheating on me?"
"I'll trade up, so technically yes?"
Post by: Egan_BW on October 08, 2020, 09:24:04 am
Post by: scriver on October 08, 2020, 09:36:54 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 10, 2020, 08:19:58 pm
I like how almost every forum member is a green socialist hipie. Until we boot up DF that is. There we rob the first elven caravan, proceed to burn the surface world with magma, and send any migrants we dislike to the atom smasher.When you have a magma cannon and a choice of sacrifices to make, well, it changes a Dwarf
Post by: Cruxador on October 11, 2020, 03:03:40 pm
87% Transhumanist, a party I'm not familiar with.
86% Democratic, the de facto party of choice for my area.
85% American Solidarity, which surprised me a lot, I hadn't heard of them but the short description I saw lead me to assume I'd have been opposite to them. Actually, they seem fairly socialist and conservationist on economic issues so I guess they must be a religious party actually considers the teachings of Jesus in their platform for once. Also quite particularist, which I do agree with on broad principle.
51% Libertarian, which'll be the "personal freedoms" half. I identified with that party more when I was younger, but these days it's clear that governments are far from the only source of oppression in our society, and can be a tool against the predations of corporate greed.
21% tied Republican and Constitution. More than most of the leftists on here, anyway.
who tf are the peace and freedom party anyway. I've never heard of them or the transhumanists. No idea what socialist party the Socialists represent either.I vote peace and freedom, on the rare occasion when I think they have a chance. It's a socialist party with more focus on respecting the rights of people of all cultures/ethnicities. I think they're mostly in California though. "Socialist" is the Socialist Party of America, you can see their logo at the end.
Also I'm less of a republican than MSH, I'm not sure what that means.
[snip]The first time I played EU3, I eventually quit because I felt morally quite horrible for consistently increasing centralization and slaughtering all the rebels that caused. Mechanically optimal, but very opposite to my actual philosophy. Conversely I like Vicky 2 because even though the culture of the age si very much about exploiting the people, you can still build your country around helping the poor and they'll reward you by becoming more valuable citizens, like in real life.
I mean, day before yesterday, in a game I've been playing recently I murdered hundreds of people trying to defend their home from an invading force, and hundreds more trying to rebel against a totalitarian criminal gang that seized the local government.
These are not things I'd do, recommend, encourage, or accept as reasonable in real life, under most any circumstances. A game is, in fact, a game, and not only is there nothing unusual or contradictory in holding beliefs and to behaviors at odds with those incentivized in games, I'd hope to every fucking hell imaginable most people would hold beliefs and to behaviors at odds with the omnicidally sociopathic horseshit games tend to reward :P
Post by: Loud Whispers on October 13, 2020, 04:51:05 am
The first time I played EU3, I eventually quit because I felt morally quite horrible for consistently increasing centralization and slaughtering all the rebels that caused. Mechanically optimal, but very opposite to my actual philosophy. Conversely I like Vicky 2 because even though the culture of the age si very much about exploiting the people, you can still build your country around helping the poor and they'll reward you by becoming more valuable citizens, like in real life.I'm greedy; I wish vic2 had just a few more mechanics to simulate the service sector and the spanish flu. I know HFM added banking, but it'd be cool if there was a proper services sector tied to how the wider economy was doing, so you'd be able to simulate 20th century Britain's reluctance to get involved in wars lest they disrupt banking and insurance for example. Would also allow you to create luxury victorian space gay eco communism.
If you could also change the visible size of your male population to include the old or young depending on your conscription, child labour & women's rights laws, that'd be even spicier. But I imagine literally doubling the pop count might be bad for computer performance.
85% American Solidarity, which surprised me a lot, I hadn't heard of them but the short description I saw lead me to assume I'd have been opposite to them. Actually, they seem fairly socialist and conservationist on economic issues so I guess they must be a religious party actually considers the teachings of Jesus in their platform for once. Also quite particularist, which I do agree with on broad principle.They might be one of those conservatives that believes in conserving society, environment & culture, instead of conservatives but only in the sense of a corporate tax cut whilst conserving nothing much at all
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on November 13, 2020, 10:51:41 pm
So, what link led you to this quiz? I’d like to take it. (Will catch up eventually)Spoiler: I am the meh (click to show/hide)
Post by: MrRoboto75 on November 13, 2020, 11:04:31 pm
shit, let's be cringe (http://memecompass.com/)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
(hey, you're back)
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on November 13, 2020, 11:06:19 pm
(sorry for the absence, thought being away would help with focusing on college work, sorry if I worried any of you)shit, let's be cringe (http://memecompass.com/)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
(hey, you're back)
Post by: MrRoboto75 on November 13, 2020, 11:14:44 pm
(sorry for the absence, thought being away would help with focusing on college work, sorry if I worried any of you)shit, let's be cringe (http://memecompass.com/)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
(hey, you're back)
(I wouldn't worry to hard about it, school's important and all that. Its just a crazy year out there I think. I go in-and-out of communities all the time so I didn't think too much of it.)
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on November 13, 2020, 11:24:58 pm
Spoiler: Results (click to show/hide)
Post by: Dunamisdeos on November 14, 2020, 12:57:48 pm
Also, glad to see you around.
Post by: Enemy post on November 14, 2020, 07:35:32 pm
Post by: Iduno on November 14, 2020, 09:53:57 pm
They need to expand their sources of memes if that sections going to have any meaning at all.
Post by: A Thing on November 28, 2020, 01:12:18 am
https://8dreams.github.io/index.html
Here we go again.
Post by: MrRoboto75 on November 28, 2020, 01:24:40 am
Post by: Arx on November 28, 2020, 02:29:58 am
Post by: scriver on November 28, 2020, 05:12:19 am
Also I have no idea what's wrong with napping. Napping is the cornerstone of my everyday.
Post by: delphonso on November 28, 2020, 07:38:55 am
Ego-Kakistocracy. What even is that?
Post by: Teneb on November 28, 2020, 09:05:58 am
I'd go further.At least it's short. It gave me "Completely Underground Manual Primal Straight Capitalism". Which is just... what?
Ego-Kakistocracy. What even is that?
EDIT: You know what, let me give ya another weirdly specific political poll of dubious value (https://leftvalues.github.io). I got Eco-Anarchism.
Post by: scriver on November 28, 2020, 09:58:45 am
I'd go further.At least it's short. It gave me "Completely Underground Manual Primal Straight Capitalism". Which is just... what?
Ego-Kakistocracy. What even is that?
That is pure poetry is what that is xD
EDIT: You know what, let me give ya another weirdly specific political poll of dubious value (https://leftvalues.github.io). I got Eco-Anarchism.
I got Centrist Marxism, followed closely by Democratic Socialism, Utopian Socialism, and Left-Wing Nationalism.
Post by: A Thing on November 28, 2020, 12:38:46 pm
Spoiler: Specter of Communism Inside (click to show/hide)
Post by: Teneb on November 28, 2020, 12:59:41 pm
Post by: misko27 on November 28, 2020, 01:00:24 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Rolan7 on November 28, 2020, 01:27:13 pm
Spoiler: Eco-Marxism (click to show/hide)
I mostly have trouble with the question of reform vs revolution, and of centralized vs community government. I have opinions but no conviction behind them. I still need to read more theory, unironically.
Post by: scriver on November 28, 2020, 01:42:15 pm
Post by: Teneb on November 28, 2020, 01:48:32 pm
So the current governments? *laugh track*Kakistocracy: "A kakistocracy is a system of government that is run by the worst, least qualified, and/or most unscrupulous citizens." It's exclusively pejorative from when it was coined in the 17th century. This is funny to me. However, Kakistocracy also is etymologically the opposite of "aristocracy", so from that perspective perhaps it can't be all bad.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Rolan7 on November 28, 2020, 02:03:10 pm
Post by: scriver on November 28, 2020, 02:10:40 pm
Revolution involves a dreadful amount of violence, but it can easily be less violent in the long run.
The people who revolution puts in charge, the ones that are best at violence, will not hesitate to use the violence that they are the best at to prevent that. Because if things are not violent, they are no longer in charge.
You don't grow a rose garden by planting thorns. You grow one by planting seeds.
Post by: Egan_BW on November 28, 2020, 05:52:26 pm
Which is to say, I don't think revolution or reform are likely to work, and I have no solutions to give. Sorry.
Post by: scriver on November 28, 2020, 08:23:31 pm
Post by: MrRoboto75 on November 28, 2020, 10:49:56 pm
I honestly don't even know if roses are grown from seeds
Which came first, the rose or the seed?
Post by: Bumber on November 29, 2020, 03:57:26 am
Kakistocracy: "A kakistocracy is a system of government that is run by the worst, least qualified, and/or most unscrupulous citizens." It's exclusively pejorative from when it was coined in the 17th century. This is funny to me. However, Kakistocracy also is etymologically the opposite of "aristocracy", so from that perspective perhaps it can't be all bad.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: Social Kekistocracy represent: (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: I got Centrist Marxism: (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on November 29, 2020, 06:36:06 am
So my closest form of government is an ego-kakistocracy, where the least qualified people run government. I imagine this would entail every local polity electing their best mate to be a member of parliament, so that the entire government cabinet consisted of simple folk deciding policy on what immediately affects people on the street. This uber populism would probably not survive very long under the weight of demagogues or lobbyists corrupting the elected officials, turning them into actual politicians - effectively indistinguishable from a normal democracy, with the only differing factor being the corrupt ones hadn't gone to Eton
https://leftvalues.github.io/results.html?a=51.5&b=17.2&c=26.7&d=35.7&e=46.2&f=18.1&g=48.5
So for this one I'm Utopian Socialism, which strives to have a moral foundation as a prerequisite for forming a marxist luxury space gay communist utopia. Between conservative-progressive, party-union and revolution-reform I'm 50/50. Yet I am 82.8% utopian, 81.9% environmentalist, 73.3% decentralist and 64.3% nationalist, which is altogether unsurprising. I love me local polities. Love me greens too, as well as me blues. Simple as
Post by: Cruxador on December 03, 2020, 09:20:02 am
In the end though,
Quote
Closest Match: Eco-AnarchismSounds about right really. It implies a focus on environment for its own sake or even over society, but the destruction of commonly held natural lands is one of the greatest probably the single most irreversible sin of capitalism. It represents the destruction of long term value for short term gain and that is the fundamental priority issue that undermines the entire capitalist system.
Eco-Anarchism, or Green Anarchism, is a form of anarchism that places a particular emphasis on environmental issues. It is often linked to more distinct ideologies such as Anarcho-Syndicalism. Eco-Anarchists are generally revolutionary and support using a decentralized egalitarian economy to achieve environmental goals.
I scored very environmental and very decentralized, scientific and pro union, and neutral on the other three. I think revolutions are bad, but also potentially better than the alternate option of doing nothing, in a society where no other political action is effective. I don't believe in the international revolution whatsoever and I support local and cultural particularism even on the level of nations, though isolationism and closed borders are practically detrimental.
My next matches were AnCom at 90%, which I think would be nice in principle but a true implementation is unsustainable due to bad actors either externally or internally as that's basically how tribalism ended on the global stage.
Market Anarchist got 88%, which I have basically the same feeling on.
Democratic Socialism at 82% which I feel is the only option that's proven to work on an international stage, even if not necessarily the perfect implementation of what's realistically possible in every case.
At 80%, left wing nationalism. Despite the connotation of that word, I agree with this; individual groups have a right to their own culture and self determination. Exterminating culture in the name of socialism indicates a misunderstanding of both.
And 80% is far enough down the list so I'll leave it there.
I did 8dreams too, and it gave me kakistocrat. It seems like that's its "moderate" option which you fall into if you don't believe anything kooky enough to get what it has as other options. That's fairly on brand, I guess.
I also took this ten groups (https://10groups.github.io/index.html) thing, which is a rather more in depth quiz. It ended up calling me a kruschevist (https://10groups.github.io/results.html?y=-2.06&ay=2.50&x=-4.00&ax=-4.00&bx=0.17&by=-4.41&cx=-1.25&cy=-0.77&dx=1.09&dy=-2.78&ex=-1.45&ey=1.83&fx=0.67&fy=-4.40&gx=-1.00&gy=2.33&hx=-1.67&hy=-3.33&ix=2.00&iy=3.25&ja=3.33&jb=-1.00&jc=-2.67&jd=-3.25) though, which seems a bit too specific and indistinct for such a quiz.
Post by: scriver on December 03, 2020, 12:33:58 pm
Post by: A Thing on December 03, 2020, 04:24:57 pm
Post by: Dostoevsky on December 03, 2020, 04:47:55 pm
I will say that a few of the questions seemed a little bit naive/ignorant - that is the question is framed as two poles and not really being aware of complicating factors.
Post by: Greiger on December 03, 2020, 05:06:02 pm
Leftvalues (https://leftvalues.github.io/results.html?a=25.0&b=51.6&c=40.0&d=64.3&e=53.8&f=41.7&g=33.8) Democratic Socialism
10Groups (https://10groups.github.io/results.html?y=-0.58&ay=1.25&x=-1.75&ax=-1.75&bx=0.00&by=-1.06&cx=-2.25&cy=-1.69&dx=-7.55&dy=1.00&ex=-0.55&ey=7.17&fx=0.33&fy=-1.00&gx=-4.60&gy=-3.67&hx=-4.33&hy=3.33&ix=-1.25&iy=-2.25&ja=1.67&jb=5.00&jc=-5.00&jd=-2.00) Social Democracy
Yea there were a few questions, especially in the 10groups one where I felt there were other important factors to consider other than a yes/no. I usually just picked one of the partially options for those. Apparently in one I prefer revolution, and in the other I prefer peaceful transition but I may be reading some of the 10 groups thing wrong.
Also I'm apparently heavily transhumanist, so I probably need to play the Deus Ex games at some point.
Post by: McTraveller on December 03, 2020, 05:28:42 pm
Economic: Realist (47.5 Altruity/ 52.5 Avarice)
Diplomatic: Ideological (35.2 Dominant/ 64.8 Insular)
Civil: Rational (55.9 Self/ 44.1 Totality)
Societal: Sensible (42.9 Stalwart/ 57.1 Hedonic)
Closest match of Kakistocracy.
I think something is broken, because I don't know how those results can be "government by the worst people." I guess the disclaimer on closest match being inaccurate is really an understatement!
Those things sound very pleasant. The thing that gets me about both the questions and the result - nothing is ever defined anywhere!
Compass results are Communal / Darwinist (2.81), Orwellian/Egoistic (-2), and Futuristic/Primal (-1.67).
I suppose that's accurate, I'm not very polarized.
Wow the 10 groups (https://10groups.github.io/results.html?y=-1.00&ay=1.88&x=-1.94&ax=-1.94&bx=2.17&by=-2.29&cx=0.00&cy=-0.31&dx=0.55&dy=-0.44&ex=-0.91&ey=0.50&fx=-0.50&fy=-3.40&gx=-0.40&gy=-2.50&hx=0.00&hy=0.00&ix=0.75&iy=6.25&ja=5.00&jb=4.00&jc=-6.67&jd=-2.50) also confirmed "middle of the road."
Spoiler: laugh-inducing (click to show/hide)
Post by: grave worm on December 04, 2020, 07:56:00 pm
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I anti-societied so hard on that quiz that I broke the 'civil axis'
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Spoiler: spooks (click to show/hide)
Post by: Rolan7 on December 04, 2020, 08:11:36 pm
And while I'm at it, "Party" vs "Union". I love unions. Why did I get a bad score on unions /s
Edit: Like I'm actually in support of a large general union that serves the rights of everybody instead of being mired in factionalism
Post by: McTraveller on December 04, 2020, 08:34:07 pm
I always thought "spook" meant a government intelligence agent. Is that still what it means?
Post by: MetalSlimeHunt on December 04, 2020, 08:59:40 pm
Might I ask what the difference between "Scientific" and "Utopian" means in the LeftValues poll?Utopian Socialism is the ideal-based pre-Marx group of socialist movements, most notably the factory town movement. Scientific Socialism is Marxism, and bases itself on material analysis instead of pursuing ideals.
Eh, I still don't know what "spook" means in the context of those surveys. Although I think the 10groups one it said something that kind of defined it.It is a reference to the philosophy of Max Stirner, generally called Egoism. Stirner's primary thesis is that all things which humans do happen on the basis of their own ego or self, but that this was divided between voluntary and involuntary acts of egoism. The latter he called geists in German, which has been variously translated as ghosts, phantasms, or most famously spooks. This includes things such as religion, nationalism, gender roles, and generally any form of societal ideology not determined by the individual.
I always thought "spook" meant a government intelligence agent. Is that still what it means?
He advocates that a person must reject these ghosts and instead follow only their own true ego, their voluntary will. This is reflected in one of the more often quoted things he wrote, which was:
Quote from: Max Stirner, The Ego and Its Own
Do you suppose the humane liberal will be so liberal as to aver that everything possible to man is human? On the contrary! He does not, indeed, share the Philistine’s moral prejudice about the strumpet, but “that this woman turns her body into a money-getting machine” makes her despicable to him as “human being.” His judgment is, the strumpet is not a human being; or, so far as a woman is a strumpet, so far is she unhuman, dehumanized. Further: The Jew, the Christian, the privileged person, the theologian, etc., is not a human being; so far as you are a Jew, etc., you are not a human being. Again the imperious postulate: Cast from you everything peculiar, criticize it away! Be not a Jew, not a Christian, but be a human being, nothing but a human being. Assert your humanity against every restrictive specification; make yourself, by means of it, a human being, and free from those limits; make yourself a “free man,” that is recognize humanity as your all-determining essence.
I say: You are indeed more than a Jew, more than a Christian, etc., but you are also more than a human being. Those are all ideas, but you are corporeal. Do you suppose, then, that you can ever become a “human being as such?” Do you suppose our posterity will find no prejudices and limits to clear away, for which our powers were not sufficient? Or do you perhaps think that in your fortieth or fiftieth year you have come so far that the following days have nothing more to dissipate in you, and that you are a human being? The men of the future will yet fight their way to many a liberty that we do not even miss. What do you need that later liberty for? If you meant to esteem yourself as nothing before you had become a human being, you would have to wait until the “last judgment,” until the day when man, or humanity, shall have attained perfection. But, as you will surely die before that, what becomes of your prize of victory?
tl;dr: Do whatever you want, fuck the police
Post by: grave worm on December 04, 2020, 10:08:08 pm
Post by: Cruxador on December 04, 2020, 11:20:20 pm
Post by: Egan_BW on December 04, 2020, 11:26:27 pm
Post by: scriver on December 05, 2020, 05:43:59 am
Post by: feelotraveller on December 05, 2020, 08:54:16 am
Post by: Cruxador on December 05, 2020, 09:25:30 am
I believe if the German "geist" is used, "spirit" would be more appropriate. At least if it is used in the same general vein as, say, "zeit-geist" ("time-spirit", "the spirit of our times")."Nationalism a spirit of our unconscious egoism" doesn't read well, though. I think "specter" is a better fit on this context.
Post by: MaximumZero on December 05, 2020, 08:31:50 pm
8dreams: Kakistocratic Communalism
Post by: delphonso on December 06, 2020, 06:40:41 am
Toady brain-washed us with shitty nobles.
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 06, 2020, 03:18:15 pm
"Fuck the police" shall be the whole of the lawlewd
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on December 06, 2020, 04:44:30 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 06, 2020, 06:12:26 pm
The word in question could also mean damage. Who thought to use the same word for both intercourse and damage?The duality of man
Post by: Teneb on December 06, 2020, 07:25:03 pm
l-lawd"Fuck the police" shall be the whole of the lawlewd
Post by: Loud Whispers on December 07, 2020, 04:11:19 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on June 27, 2022, 06:38:17 am
I met a banker who swore by these like they were word of God but I feel a lot of these are just obvious self-descriptions that you could easily learn by asking the same questions. E.g. are you willing to step on others to get ahead? Answering yes, no or I don't know is already self-evident
At any rate I got INFJ-A when I did this test years ago, and I did it again and still got INFJ-A. Supposed to be a special rare unicorn personality but I don't think it's as rare as they say it is, or perhaps it's more accurate to say that each of the personality "types" have traits which they all share in common - in which case are they even really "types?"
46% Extraverted - 54% Introverted
I expected the introversion to be much higher tbh
86% Intuitive - 14% Observant
This one is funny to me, because they define observant as pragmatic, focused on obvious realities, focused on stability, whilst the intuitive is big picture thinking, theoretical and exploratory. I do not see this as one or the other, as I have both traits in abundance despite the test disagreeing
44% Thinking - 56% Feeling
Objectivity (thinking) vs Sentimentality (Feeling)
This is another one of those odd things where I do not see why logic, emotion, efficiency or cooperation are viewed as exclusive things. They are all very compatible
51% Judging - 49% Prospecting
Decisive, organised (judging) vs Improvising, opportunistic flexibility (prospecting)
This is another one of those things where surely everyone strives to be decisive and organised, but still be flexible and spontaneous? Why not both?
90% Assertive - 10% Turbulent
This is probably the only one where I agree completely with my result, but with the obvious caveat that it's hardly rocket science to answer a test by saying "I am a pillar of stability" and the test concluding "yes you are stable." From my earliest memories I have had to endure many hardships and stresses, and it seems to have always been a core part of who I am that I remain emotionally constant, slow to passions and resistant to pressure. This tendency has only grown greater with time; there is simply no point worrying about whatever you have no control over. Do what you can and keep going. I remember having a funny discussion with one of my friends. I told him I only judge my past actions based off of the information I had in the past, so even if things turned out to be a mistake, I do not care because I made the best choice with the information I had. He asked with much incredulity - "but then you would never regret anything?" To which I replied, yes, I never regret anything
Post by: Haspen on June 27, 2022, 07:02:58 am
Today... I got the same result. Huh.
10% Extraverted - 90% Introverted
48% Intuitive - 52% Observant
48% Thinking - 52% Feeling
47% Judging - 53% Prospecting
35% Assertive - 65% Turbulent
I hate all social stuff, I'm easy to agree with other people's plans and I am easily excited by curiosities and new things? Checks out.
Post by: dragdeler on June 27, 2022, 07:37:31 am
Quote
Dominant: Introverted Intuition (Ni)
Auxiliary: Extraverted Feeling (Fe)
Tertiary: Introverted Thinking (Ti)
Inferior: Extraverted Sensing (Se)
...shortened to infj. Yeah spoiler apparantly I'm one too and the fact that you too makes me kinda confident I could maybe tell them apart. I mean if the model is to believed we should raise eachothers neckhair since introverted intuition is the dominant trait lol... Yeah I'm not a fan of attributing types it's basically modern astrology... I did just enjoy reading up on the traits and their "hierarchisation", as a model.
Post by: None on June 27, 2022, 08:41:13 am
Hypothetically, the tests that put you on the extroverted/introverted or thinking/feeling or intuitive/sensing or judging/perceiving axes are bunk, since current theory suggests we use cognitive functions in a stack (the Ni/Fe/Ti/Se in dragdeler's quote) and you can't capture that with the prior test.
You're defined as an extroverted type if your first/primary function is an extroverted one, and an introverted type if the second function is extroverted. You're a judging type if said extroverted function is one that makes decisions, ie feeling or thinking. The rest is just preference for intuition/observation or thinking/feeling, which sort of depend more on inner structure/source of values than it does how you may push your glasses up your nose and go 'acktyully' or for one to quantify feelings.
No clue about the assertive/turbulent stuff, I think that's a 16personalities gimmick?
I mean, it's likely probably all horseshit, but it's fun.
Post by: scriver on June 27, 2022, 11:25:19 am
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And sure I too would like to believe the descriptions are just basic "pander to vanity by using general positive traits nobody would not call themselves" bullshit but the description of the Mediator do feel a lot like me. Maybe I'm just vain. I'd rather be Samwise than Frodo though.
I think we've had these before in the thread. Would be interesting to look back and see what I got then but as a Mediator my attention span is fickle
Post by: TD1 on June 30, 2022, 09:05:57 am
This test was no exception. I'm an ENFP-T (Campaigner (https://www.16personalities.com/enfp-personality)).
Emphasis on the T, unfortunately. I really need to work on the self-doubt malarkey :-\
Still, yea, the description is very accurate.
Quote
“Maybe I could…fly helicopters and be an oceanographer who writes songs and cooks?” Campaigners (ENFPs) are known for having a wealth of ideas, interests, and hobbies – to the extent that they may struggle to fit everything that they care about into their lives.
Hahaha, you mean to say the creative writing, PhD, engine-dismantling, piano, baking, bee-keeping, drawing and song-writing is too much?!?!
Post by: None on June 30, 2022, 09:23:03 am
I'm not nearly as much of a leader as it pegs me for, but I do kind of end up bubbling into leadership roles. But, well, we get this way because it's doing introverted/extroverted as an axis like the other traits and not the aforementioned cognitive functions, soooo. 16personalities is notoriously unreliable from what I've seen online.
Post by: hector13 on June 30, 2022, 12:52:10 pm
Which I think is inaccurate, but whatevs. I always get 100% on the introvert scale though heh.
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 03, 2022, 01:12:53 pm
Hahaha, you mean to say the creative writing, PhD, engine-dismantling, piano, baking, bee-keeping, drawing and song-writing is too much?!?!Does that mean you can wax lyrical?
Post by: TD1 on July 03, 2022, 06:16:40 pm
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on July 03, 2022, 09:43:45 pm
Post by: Ziusudra on July 03, 2022, 09:46:55 pm
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on July 03, 2022, 10:24:29 pm
Post by: Eschar on July 04, 2022, 02:34:20 am
Oh O forgot that was a thing, whoopsPresumably we don't call earwax humanwax because we're more familiar with human body parts, as opposed to just associating bee products with "bees."
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on July 04, 2022, 02:36:52 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 04, 2022, 09:16:55 am
Post by: TD1 on July 04, 2022, 09:40:30 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on July 04, 2022, 12:54:44 pm
Post by: MaximumZero on July 05, 2022, 01:44:58 am
Anybody done one of these? (https://www.16personalities.com/)I'm still an INTJ, although I have a -T now.
21% Extroverted <----> 79% Introverted (I usually score 100% Introverted.)
90% Intuitive <----> 10% Observant
53% Thinking <----> 47% Feeling
60% Judging <----> 40% Prospecting
21% Assertive <----> 79% Turbulent (I feel like I'm pretty assertive, but okay.)
Post by: Bumber on July 05, 2022, 05:20:24 am
100% Introverted
62% Observant
75% Thinking
72% Prospecting
74% Assertive
Insight of the Day: "Virtuosos are the most likely personality type to sleep in."
That's mainly because my chronic insomnia keeps me up all night, but okay.
Post by: TD1 on July 05, 2022, 09:53:24 am
I feel like I'm pretty assertive, but okay.
The mighty smiter of potatoes, not assertive? Never!!
Post by: TD1 on February 10, 2023, 09:24:00 am
My top three: Lightweaver, Edgedancer, Willshaper
Post by: scriver on February 10, 2023, 09:38:00 am
I feel as if we've had a quiz like this before?
Post by: McTraveller on February 10, 2023, 10:08:22 am
63%, 63%, 60%, 60%, 57%, 54%, 54%, 47%, 45%, 40%.
I wouldn't say that's particularly strongly or weakly aligned with anything. Sure I have some tendencies, but it's not an "absolutely do this, and absolutely don't do this."
Post by: Haspen on February 10, 2023, 11:07:36 am
Post by: hector13 on February 10, 2023, 11:37:58 am
Elsecaller 68%
Skybreaker 56%
I also know nothing of these.
Post by: Loud Whispers on February 10, 2023, 04:11:16 pm
57% edgedancer
55% bondsmith
Makes sense. Someone who operates alone but also builds giant squads, someone who cares more about protecting others, and someone who tends to work more with people outside the order than those within, and who tends to cultivate a ginormous coterie of squires
Post by: Akura on February 10, 2023, 04:31:05 pm
I feel as if we've had a quiz like this before?
I feel like I've definitely seen some kind of knightly order quiz before. Though this one seems slightly different.
81% Truthwatcher, 70% Elsecaller, 68% tie between Windrunner and Edgedancer for me.
Post by: MaximumZero on February 10, 2023, 04:41:45 pm
Elsecaller: 67
Windrunner: 61
Skybreaker/Stoneward/Willshaper: 55
Truthwatcher: 51
Lightweaver/Dustbringer: 41
Edgedancer: 38
Bondsmith: 36
There were a couple false dichotomies that I don't like, like "library vs dojo," which for me is 100/100, or "fencing vs boxing," which I used to do both (if you count general swordsmanship like kendo, and general unarmed combat like kickboxing.)
Post by: Magmacube_tr on February 10, 2023, 05:15:23 pm
According to the test in the OP...
Introvert(78%)
Intuitive(25%)
Thinking(28%)
Perceiving(6%)
INTP personality type
I felt exposed by that description lmao
Post by: EuchreJack on February 11, 2023, 04:30:11 pm
100% Windbreaker
Post by: Rolan7 on February 11, 2023, 08:42:46 pm
Hm, according to this new test I am...100% Thinking
100% Windbreaker
Post by: TD1 on February 13, 2023, 06:07:00 am
66% windrunner
57% edgedancer
55% bondsmith
Makes sense. Someone who operates alone but also builds giant squads, someone who cares more about protecting others, and someone who tends to work more with people outside the order than those within, and who tends to cultivate a ginormous coterie of squires
You're what would happen if Dalinar and Kaladin had a lovechild.
Post by: Bumber on February 20, 2023, 03:09:58 am
Hm, according to this new test I am...
100% Windbreaker
Too much beans, probably.
Post by: Loud Whispers on March 20, 2023, 07:07:20 am
Tell me the lore about Dallinar and Kaladin66% windrunner
57% edgedancer
55% bondsmith
Makes sense. Someone who operates alone but also builds giant squads, someone who cares more about protecting others, and someone who tends to work more with people outside the order than those within, and who tends to cultivate a ginormous coterie of squires
You're what would happen if Dalinar and Kaladin had a lovechild.
Post by: TD1 on March 20, 2023, 07:29:55 pm
GENUINE SPOILERS
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I've kept the spoilers vague and confined to the first book or so. I'll repeat what I said above, though.
Read
The
Books
Speak the words which were forgotten
Post by: Laterigrade on March 20, 2023, 10:05:04 pm
I tried that, but lyrical's a bit of a wuss.lol
Post by: Great Order on March 20, 2023, 10:27:30 pm
60% Windrunner and Edgedancer.
So I'm the person who runs the library and moonlights as a paramedic.
Post by: Naturegirl1999 on March 27, 2023, 04:32:18 pm
Truthwatcher
80%
Elsecaller
71%
Lightweaver
63%
Willshaper
63%
Skybreaker
60%
Windrunner
60%
Edgedancer
56%
Stoneward
56%
Dustbringer
53%
Bondsmith
36%
Post by: Magmacube_tr on September 05, 2023, 06:07:06 am
Which one are you?
Post by: delphonso on September 05, 2023, 06:14:13 am
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 05, 2023, 07:18:14 am
Post by: dragdeler on September 05, 2023, 08:13:08 am
boy:vapour
jealous:monzo and syeno bomrek
red dress: omni clay
Post by: scriver on September 05, 2023, 08:58:37 am
I go by Marl now.
HEH, you tell 'em, Marl
Post by: notquitethere on September 05, 2023, 03:52:56 pm
Parents: We've got Peridotite at home
The Peridotite at home: Halzburgite
Post by: Magmacube_tr on September 05, 2023, 04:15:05 pm
Post by: Bumber on September 06, 2023, 12:47:29 am
Post by: delphonso on September 06, 2023, 07:35:17 am
Post by: McTraveller on September 06, 2023, 12:02:40 pm
Ideally I'd include more terms, but I'm also lazy, so I just put that at the front.
Post by: Magmacube_tr on September 06, 2023, 04:02:34 pm
I want to be lazy yellow-silver foid-bearing vaporous omni-clay dust that contains hyper-silt lava spectrum-sand crystal clathrates.
Then what, you slimy liberal!!?!???? Marrying with dogs?!!?!?!? /j
Post by: Sirus on September 06, 2023, 05:35:58 pm
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 07, 2023, 02:44:45 am
Post by: Bumber on September 07, 2023, 04:42:03 pm
Ideally I'd be fine like sand
What's if it's coarse, rough, and gets everywhere?
Post by: WealthyRadish on September 07, 2023, 05:08:21 pm
(https://i.postimg.cc/VLG0PQRc/shale.png)
Which one are you?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Post by: Loud Whispers on September 09, 2023, 04:22:05 pm
What's if it's coarse, rough, and gets everywhere?Then we must retreat to the water. I like the water
Post by: Magmacube_tr on September 09, 2023, 04:43:57 pm
What's if it's coarse, rough, and gets everywhere?Then we must retreat to the water. I like the water
Yea let's go!
Post by: hector13 on September 09, 2023, 08:14:21 pm
What's if it's coarse, rough, and gets everywhere?Then we must retreat to the water. I like the water
Yea let's go!
You have died of kelpie, game over.
Post by: Magmacube_tr on September 09, 2023, 08:56:50 pm
What's if it's coarse, rough, and gets everywhere?Then we must retreat to the water. I like the water
Yea let's go!
You have died of kelpie, game over.
I am the mountainblood spirit, I am not gonna die from such a trivial reason.
Post by: hector13 on September 09, 2023, 09:01:58 pm
What's if it's coarse, rough, and gets everywhere?Then we must retreat to the water. I like the water
Yea let's go!
You have died of kelpie, game over.
I am the mountainblood spirit, I am not gonna die from such a trivial reason.
Given enough time, even mountains bow down to water.