Where are you?

[S485122]

Since a discussion about GM spawned, I moved it to its own thread : GM bankrupcy.

[kruoli]

http://www.politicalcompass.org/your...-0.75&soc=2.05

So it seems I am the first (slightly) Authoritarian here? Interestingly, it doesn't really fit the graphic here, where there is only one party in Germany shown with an authority value below mine and is "left" from me. Going from this party graphic, I would sit way more to the right and around half the way up in the blue quadrant. So I understand why some say the test is "leaning to the left".

Multiple question in the test would be considered a no-go here if answered in one specific way (e.g. racism, sexism, homophobia, etc.).

[storm5510]

Interesting question with more than one valid answer.

My response is: 38°N 85°W.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by storm5510

Interesting question with more than one valid answer.

My response is: 38°N 85°W.

Well, if you are going geographical, https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6422...8688595,14.63z will lead to my position to within a metre or so for some of the year and https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1433.../data=!3m1!1e3 for most of the rest of it.

[Uncwilly]

Somewhere about here

[Batalov]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

Somewhere about here

“A friend of mine once sent me a post card with a picture of the entire planet Earth taken from space. On the back it said, 'Wish you were here.”
― Steven Wright

[storm5510]

Originally Posted by xilman

Well, if you are going geographical, https://www.google.com/maps/@28.6422...8688595,14.63z will lead to my position to within a metre or so for some of the year and https://www.google.com/maps/@52.1433.../data=!3m1!1e3 for most of the rest of it.

La Palma, not far from Tenerife, the site of the world's most horrific airline accident in 1977. 747's don't mix well on the same runway.

[M344587487]

(-5.25, -8.05)

I know it's a very basic measure but these questions miss a lot of nuance and don't really reflect the times, more than US centric it seems 2001 US centric. For example the sex section touches (barely) privacy morality homosexuality. Identity and choice particularly including trans and non-binary is a much bigger deal now and is simply not represented, the viewpoint of many of the details of these categories cannot accurately be assumed based on the opinions on "is gay a choice" and "should they be allowed to adopt".

Social is reasonably covered (although it needs a lot more coverage of mental health, disability, where the hell are guns etc). Medical care needs more nuance than one question that doesn't pinpoint anything at all (even if you're pro universal healthcare you're probably also pro going private for better/faster treatment if desired/necessary, how the answer translates to a compass point must be grossly misinterpreted). Patents on medication, capitalist overcharging of medication bankrupting those that get ill, important data points that might have a different answer than the answers given for capitalism in general.

Capitalism is reasonably covered, religion is touched on but the chance should be given to delve into the stickier aspects. There's 5 questions in the religious section but only two are actually religious questions. What the hell astrology or luck has to do with anything I don't know (how does susceptibility to nonsense relate to a compass point? Is it that this nonsense doesn't have an agenda/relevance behind it which means...what?). Charity is not a religious thing but it's in the religious section (was that to be charitable to religion?).

Privacy is a particular interest of mine and I'm glad that there's one question at least that directly covers surveillance, but 20 years on it's a massive deal that deserves its own section. Facial recognition is becoming prevalent to the point where it's being introduced in schools (normalising, no real choice), behaviours are tracked knowingly and unknowingly for many reasons, ownership of personal data is a separate issue, many of the above are being automated into ever more complex models generally not for the benefit of society, etc.

Also the four options are flawed. I answered many things strongly because I do strongly believe them even if they're not directly applicable to me personally, but then the strong opinions that do apply don't have any distinction when they should probably be given more weight from self-interest. You can't move the non-applicable strong opinions to be weak opinions because then you can't distinguish those from the actual weak opinions. Adding mild-agree/mild-disagree for 6 options instead of 4 is probably as good as it gets to balance between nuance and giving the user too much scope for interpretation.

I took the test again this time reducing the strong beliefs that do not directly apply to me by a notch, and got (-5.75, -7.59). Pretty much the same ballpark, might indicate that picking one way or the other has more weight than how strongly the belief is held.

If you think this is bad you should see the rants I make about the cosmo quiz telling me my favourite band member is Harry Styles.

[Batalov]

Originally Posted by M344587487

... quiz telling me my favourite band member is Harry Styles.

Beats the quiz that tells you that your favourite band member is Nigel Tufnel.

People weep instantly when they hear it, and I don't know why.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by Batalov

Beats the quiz that tells you that your favourite band member is Nigel Tufnel.

Derek Smalls is my favourite.

BTW, did you know that Mick Shrimpton died recently? Amazingly enough he did not drown in someone else's vomit, neither did he spontaneously combust. AFAIK, gardening played no part in his demise either.

[Batalov]

Authorities said... best leave it... unsolved.