Author Topic: A Political Test that Sucks Less  (Read 5619 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Valerius

  • Pope
  • ****
  • Posts: 444
  • Gender: Male
  • Gentlemen.
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #30 on: August 31, 2013, 10:43:58 pm »
Interesting, but I have to agree with others in that a lot of the questions are poorly worded or too vague, and the complete lack of description regarding their methodology doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in the accuracy of this test. Also agreeing with Mademoiselle Antéchriste; would have been nice to weight more questions.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #31 on: September 01, 2013, 01:24:20 pm »
Quote
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat . 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 5 percent are more extremist than you.




Okay, whose sac do I have to gargle to get a Cosmo in this dive?

I took a test with an identical graphic back in '86.....looks like with all that aging, I have turned into my mother, as so many pundits predict. Breaks my inner child's punk anarchist twentysomething's heart  :'(
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8108
  • Gender: Male
  • A man of no consequence.
    • My Twitter
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #32 on: September 02, 2013, 09:34:11 am »
Quote
You are a Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 5 percent are more extremist than you.



Almost dead-centre...huh.  Guess because I don't believe we shouldn't have to go back to wiping our asses with leaves and eating berries, then I'm some crazed anthropocentrist.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #33 on: September 02, 2013, 06:24:08 pm »
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline Her3tiK

  • Suffers in Sanity
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1940
  • Gender: Male
  • Learn to Swim
    • HeretiK Productions
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #34 on: September 02, 2013, 08:07:38 pm »
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.
Which, for the record, I am okay with.
Her3tik, you have groupies.
Ego: +5

There are a number of ways, though my favourite is simply to take them by surprise. They're just walking down the street, minding their own business when suddenly, WHACK! Penis to the face.

Offline RavynousHunter

  • Master Thief
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 8108
  • Gender: Male
  • A man of no consequence.
    • My Twitter
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #35 on: September 03, 2013, 10:35:18 am »
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.

Its always come across as a very loaded question, for me.  Some seem to ask it meaning what you said, developing new ways of doing old things, and doing them better.  Others seem to be of the anarcho-primitive persuasion and think we should all go back to mud huts and shitting in holes in the ground.

Switching to electric cars and developing better/smarter energy doesn't come across as a drastic change in our lifestyle; its just doing the same things we've been doing for generations, only better.  Its improvement.  Ya know, like we've been doing for centuries.
Quote from: Bra'tac
Life for the sake of life means nothing.

Offline Flying Mint Bunny!

  • Zoot be praised and to His Chosen victory
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 873
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2013, 10:52:21 am »
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.

Its always come across as a very loaded question, for me.  Some seem to ask it meaning what you said, developing new ways of doing old things, and doing them better.  Others seem to be of the anarcho-primitive persuasion and think we should all go back to mud huts and shitting in holes in the ground.

Switching to electric cars and developing better/smarter energy doesn't come across as a drastic change in our lifestyle; its just doing the same things we've been doing for generations, only better.  Its improvement.  Ya know, like we've been doing for centuries.

I agree, I don't really see using cleaner energy and recycling as drastic changes. To me a drastic change would be giving up modern technology or having to use those nasty washable sanitary towels  :-\

Offline PosthumanHeresy

  • Directing Scenes for Celebritarian Needs
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 2626
  • Gender: Male
  • Whatever doesn't kill you is gonna leave a scar
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2013, 12:15:30 pm »
I don't think it's loaded. Whatever you think it is, all yeses to it are pro-environment. All nos are saying you're not willing to make drastic, whatever you consider as drastic, changes.
What I used to think was me is just a fading memory. I looked him right in the eye and said "Goodbye".
 - Trent Reznor, Down In It

Together as one, against all others.
- Marilyn Manson, Running To The Edge of The World

Humanity does learn from history,
sadly, they're rarely the ones in power.

Quote from: Ben Kuchera
Life is too damned short for the concept of “guilty” pleasures to have any meaning.

Offline mellenORL

  • Pedal Pushing Puppy Peon
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 3876
  • Gender: Female
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2013, 02:39:05 pm »
The idea of just giving up having a relatively big fast car is "drastic" to a lot of people here, at least. Our cities and big towns just sprawl out with so much distance between businesses and dwelling areas. I can't afford an electric or hybrid car ATM. With the current next-to-useless one bus per hour per route transit system in Orlando, I would be fucked if I were physically unable to ride a bike.  Even with an electric hub motor added to that bike, I'd have to rethink about where I shop due to distance issues and cargo weight.  Cabs are too expensive, so I'd just have to bike commute in the rain, like all the fucking time. At least that'll rinse off the sweat :P.

This is what the vast majority of Americans now face as an alternative to owning a car. Grim mass transit, oxymoronically named, especially for old and poor folks. Awful-so-no-way-not-ever as far as the better off folks are concerned. So, no tax initiatives pass to truly improve it and make it viable. Private companies don't do mass transit much anymore since the '50's because right-of-way costs and capital risks are too high considering the entrenched negative mindset the public has about how awful our transit system has been, forever. How do you "sell" even the ideal efficient pleasant transit system to an embittered market?

Retrofitting buildings and dwellings to the latest LEED's level energy saving in materials, methods, appliances, etc. is quite expensive, at least until market competition made lower costs occur. So that would be  economically drastic for most people. The utility bill "break even" point would take quite a few years. Retrofitting is often nearly twice as labor intensive (and doubly expensive) as building new to LEEDs stats.

For example, the cost to go off grid, or better; reverse your electric meter (you make more electricity than you use, and it's bought by your electric company - which makes your construction loan payments quite a bit easier) with a full array of solar panels is 35 K and up for the average suburban home. Eventually, a solar panel array will cost less than a major re-roofing job. If you are allowed to do it yourself, which isn't the case everywhere, it's about half that much, less if you shop for bargains or salvage on the non-panel basic stuff (wire, fasteners, etc).

The old roof over my condo?  It's gonna cost 22K for a contractor to replace it with the exact same roof type that is failing now after 35 years. To bring the new roofing up to LEEDs insulation standards - not including solar - would add another 7K for a 6 inch thick sprayed foam sealant/insul layer to the big flat roof sections between mansard shingle roof cupolas, which themselves get special insulation. In my case, the insulation is to prevent heat intrusion into the house and for efficient storm water drainage. Getting a few K back from government rebate programs does not help enough, and most of those will expire before I am able to re-roof. I could actually physically do the basic stripping, roof deck repair, joint sealing of the re-roofing job myself with a couple of local handy men since I have experience and skill in professional remodeling (with thousands of bucks in tools in my garage). That would save me enough to pay the foam roof contractor to finish the job and meet LEEDs. But I am legally forbidden to do anything beyond changing a light fixture or painting a shutter by the rules of my weird, cheap-ass, lawyer driven condo association >:(. Fuck me. If they did allow me to do it myself, I could also find a way to afford to install that net gain solar panel array, adding on in phases over time, with just one electrician to help install, supervise my work, and sign off on it with the building inspector. Double fuck me. >:( >:(

All these many economic and legal impediments to an energy efficient, clean economy are the end result of years of bad legislation from manipulation by old school corporations that make money off the status quo, mostly Big Oil, and by some regional electric company conglomerates via ALEC and the GOP domination of Congress.
Quote from: Ultimate Chatbot That Totally Passes The Turing Test
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.

Offline Sleepy

  • Fuck Yes Sunshine In a Bag
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4598
  • Gender: Female
  • Danger zone
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2013, 02:53:07 pm »
I agree that those can be considered drastic changes when you factor in cost, but the statement from the test was worded "We should reduce our living standards massively to protect the environment." I don't see conversion to solar panels, switching to fuel efficient cars, etc. as reducing living standards, but merely as a more "green" way of living. That's why I responded with "I disagree." Asking people to significantly lower their standards just isn't feasible at this point.

For the record, I took the test and received errors, so I didn't get results. And I found it to be way too vague, so I'm not going to bother trying again.
Guys, this is getting creepy. Can we talk about cannibalism instead?

If a clown eats salmon on Tuesday, how much does a triangle weigh on Jupiter? Ask Mr. Wiggins for 10% off of your next dry cleaning bill. -Hades

Offline Alehksunos

  • Transvestite Boo-kin
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1456
  • Gender: Male
  • Gay Witch for Abortion
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #40 on: September 11, 2013, 01:21:34 am »
Quote
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 16 percent are more extremist than you.





I can't say I'm surprised at all, other than a tiny dose of "Anthropocentrism."

Oh yes, I am another of those folks who voted "Strongly disagree" on compulsory religious education in public schools because I feel like organized religion has no place in public education. And also, the denial of the "Theory" of Evolution (which there is overwhelming evidence of and there is no reason to still believe in Divine Creation).

Here is something I just thought about: Once again, this test ranked me as 10% "Anthropocentric", yet I express strong support for environmentalism (I've been this way since 2000, even leading to an obsession about pollution and why it's so important to counteract with such), yet it even claims I'm a wee small bit an Anthropocentrist, because I eat meat, maintain a neutral position on animal testing and doesn't believe in going fuck-all with the industrialization that made us who we are today, just for the sake of the environment. Also both the ideology of anarcho-primativists and a grating meme from anti-enviromentalists, usually social conservatives and Free-market Capitalists, whom have been so corrupted by their greed that they don't think the safety and welfare of the workers, their customers and any communities revolving around their presence matters: To them, it's all about the money. I won't go into any more detail, because mellenORL already gone into as much detail as needed for me.

When taking this test, there were a few broad questions (and I also wondered about the absence of the issue of abortion was), but the outcome is so infuriating in retrospect because I'm being pegged as a small dose of a bastard who just doesn't give a fuck about the environment and other shit. And should I also mention that humans are omnivores, like chimpanzees, one of the very few closest creatures to our intellect and sapience?

Offline Ironchew

  • Official Edgelord
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 1888
  • Gender: Male
  • The calm, intellectual Trotsky-like Trotskyist
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #41 on: September 13, 2013, 01:58:36 am »
Tried taking the test and it didn't even start before it spewed SQL debug info at me :(
Consumption is not a politically combative act — refraining from consumption even less so.

Offline The Right Honourable Mlle Antéchrist

  • The Very Punny Punisher and Owner of the Most Glorious Chest
  • The Beast
  • *****
  • Posts: 4316
  • Gender: Female
  • And I fired two warning shots... into his head.
    • Tumblr Image Blog
Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
« Reply #42 on: September 13, 2013, 02:11:13 am »
There's a propriety software/"Ironchew got own'd" pun in here somewhere, but I just can't find it.
"Je me presse de rire de tout, de peur d'être obligé d'en pleurer."

My Blog (Sometimes NSFW)