Fife wrote:lol... I seriously wonder if anybody here or from the DCF actually voted LP in 2016. The LP set a good example for the DNC, and it seems they are following suit.
You didn't. And I think you were the biggest lolberg around.
Fife wrote:lol... I seriously wonder if anybody here or from the DCF actually voted LP in 2016. The LP set a good example for the DNC, and it seems they are following suit.
Doesn't LP stand for Love Pimp now?
They could have nominated that naked stoner and a bum off the street and done less damage to the brand than what they went with.
Fife wrote:lol... I seriously wonder if anybody here or from the DCF actually voted LP in 2016. The LP set a good example for the DNC, and it seems they are following suit.
Doesn't LP stand for Love Pimp now?
They could have nominated that naked stoner and a bum off the street and done less damage to the brand than what they went with.
de officiis wrote:I think that test tries to shoehorn your thoughts into restrictive choices.
That's definitely how I felt. Too much language about "always" and "all" and a question I didn't understand at all. I looked up the term and it still seems like a loaded question
de officiis wrote:I think that test tries to shoehorn your thoughts into restrictive choices.
That's definitely how I felt. Too much language about "always" and "all" and a question I didn't understand at all. I looked up the term and it still seems like a loaded question
de officiis wrote:I think that test tries to shoehorn your thoughts into restrictive choices.
That's definitely how I felt. Too much language about "always" and "all" and a question I didn't understand at all. I looked up the term and it still seems like a loaded question
Which is exactly why I'm being pushed authoritarian. If these people would just leave me and mine alone, I would happily recede towards the lolberg side of the spectrum and stay there.
The state is a Djinn, you rub the lamp, you make your wish, but there's always a catch.
Agree on the biased wording of the questions, it's not written well at al, especially if you wanted an accurate instrument to measure with.
Each question should be worded in the positive phrasing that those who agree with it would use i their argument for the position.
You can tell the website was a quick and dirty website that got way more use than was intended.
I'm actually interested in making a better version of a political compass website... I'll have to find some sort of methodology behind the weighted grading, but the basics are pretty easy to set up. Second part is getting the topic sets, either 1 or 2 axis arguments for each value.
Any thoughts on best practices and improvements for this? A non-partisan, more useful, political compass?