[tcaudilllg]

I made a personality test that concretely defines personality types.

http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?testid=621982897915119820

My score: 1 Shadow, 1 Marriage, 2 Soul, 1 Meaning

I would have used catagories, but OKCupid doesn't allow for 108 catagories for one test.

[janus]

This is a joke, right?

[Mandrake]

I'm starting to think that LgB is actually one of us, posing as a brilliantly concieved vastly annoying troll.
_________________
"Well, last time I flicked on a lighter, I'm pretty sure I didn't create a black hole."-
Xmark

http://pauljessup.com

[RuneLancer]

Labels are fun!

Because we all fit into badly-conceived esotheric subcategories that sound like a hippie's dreamland come true! :D
_________________
Endless Saga
An OpenGL RPG in the making. Now with new hosting!

[Gooseman]

Lord Galbalan. You do realise that these stupid test things are utterly absurd and useless and rubbish and just generally bad?!

I hope so for your sake, else I pity you....

[tcaudilllg]

I would, but they work. If you answer them honestly.

Usually I can cookie cutter a person into one of those 108 catagories quite easily, although megalomania is a difficult trait to measure....

I'd like to know what your scores are on it.

Alright, perhaps you don't think these tests are valid, but what about the Big Five test? The entire psychological community accepts it, even though it has absolutely no basis in biology nor neurology. Jung's work at least has the latter. It's a bad idea to cookie cutter people into one of 108 types outright, because morals vary even within those catagories. Better yet, subdivide the 108 types along AD&D alignment lines (lawfull good, chaotic neutral, etc.) and then subdivide those along Big Five lines, if you like. Although, the Big Five test is actually terribly flawed, because traits like "agreeableness" and "openness" are extremely subjective.

Science is objective, never subjective. Subjective "science" is *not* truth.

[Nephilim]

[LeoDraco]

[BadMrBox]

I took that 'test' of yours but after waiting about 5 minutes for the answer I have given up hope. Aren't four questions alittle to little by the way?
_________________

[Gooseman]

[tcaudilllg]

[biggerUniverse]

At first, I wrote a long post trying to drive home to LdG that these posts are silly, and they draw attention and energy away from RPG development.

Then I decided that I might as well address the larger audience. The best way to rebutt posts of this type is to ignore them. Not whimsically or mockingly, but truly. Just don't post a reply.

I often write out replies to posts and then never submit them- after all I only wrote them to hear myself talk(type). I had no hope of changing anyone's opinion, nor did I set out to do so in the first place. I just wanted to be argumentative, it helped no one but me, so why should anyone else need to read it.

I'd like to come to these forums and know which threads are actually worth my while based on the number of posts. Not find that it's another LdG smackdown.

[Gooseman]

Yes good point. We should ignore these stupid threads. (Note to Lord Galbalan; don't create these threads).

But it is fun to mock...

And it is in the off topic forum so...

Anyway i agree we should ignore.

[LeoDraco]

biggerUniverse: Yeah, I was going to avoid this one, too. Actually, as Mandrake has been the heaviest contender in bashing Galbalan's usage of personality tests, I was holding out some hope that I would have some good reading material. But, then, I just couldn't resist beating the old dead hag.

But, per (implied) request, I'll put on the blinders more tightly, in the future.

Galbalan: while children have personalities unique from their parent's (and other authority figures in their environment, ranging from Day Care Keepers/School Teachers (is there a difference? Heh.) to older best friends), most children don't start to develop out of the cookie-cutter mold impressed upon them by their environment until their teenage years. Even then, formative people are still impressionable, which is one of the reasons why certain topics are taboo --- at least, in America; I cannot speak for you non-American types --- in pre-university schools. While I still allow my environment to shape me, it is usually a voluntary escape from the (perceived) freedom of individuality. I had absolutely no say in any of the activities, music, movies, television shows, etc. to which I was subjected as a child --- partly due to disinterest in topics I did not understand, but mostly due to parental censorship. Children, I hold, are not free-thinking individuals --- in the sense that "adults" are --- and to contend that anything that a child thinks is relevant to anything at all is, as I see things, asinine.
_________________
"...LeoDraco is a pompus git..." -- Mandrake

[DeveloperX]