Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Socialist

16 (32%)

Green

8 (16%)

Peace and Freedom

2 (4%)

Democratic

1 (2%)

Transhumanist

11 (22%)

Libertarian

8 (16%)

Republican

2 (4%)

Constitution

2 (4%)

Total Members Voted: 49

[Orange Wizard]

inb4 Steven Hawking sues the creators of said useful test.

[MaximumZero]

Dos Equis.

That is horrible stuff, by the way. Pretty sure they named it Dos Equis because it tastes like licking two horse asses.

[Graknorke]

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)"

[Tawa]

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.

Spoiler: Fairly accurate, too. (click to show/hide)

You enjoy making plans and commitments but you sometimes don't follow through. 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 can be critical at times, but you are supportive to most people. You live a quiet life and are reserved in your actions and behaviors.

Of course it's also pretty short, so it's not difficult to guess.

Dude this thing just throws Barnum Statements and Rainbow Ruses at you.

[scrdest]

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.

Spoiler: Fairly accurate, too. (click to show/hide)

You enjoy making plans and commitments but you sometimes don't follow through. 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 can be critical at times, but you are supportive to most people. You live a quiet life and are reserved in your actions and behaviors.

Of course it's also pretty short, so it's not difficult to guess.

Dude this thing just throws Barnum Statements and Rainbow Ruses at you.

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.

[Knit tie]

So, what are we all doing now?

[MaximumZero]

Taking personality quizzes and then bitching about the quality of said quizzes.

[wierd]

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.)

[SirQuiamus]

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

...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.   

[Cthulhu]

You need to keep the OP updated, ain't nobody got time to sift through six billion pages to find the current quiz.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

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.

[wierd]

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

...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.

[Knit tie]

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.

So you won't point me to the current quiz?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

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.

So you won't point me to the current quiz?

Come back when you're a little...mmm....richer.

Or jump back and forth pages to isolate the most recent thread title.

[4maskwolf]

I am Joseph Goebbels, minister of propoganda for Nazi Germany.

...

...

...

4mask confirmed for Nazi.