The Political Compass

[Abs.]

[me=Abs.]awaits update, where Parkur isn't so lonely [/me]

[Callid]

[me=Abs.]awaits update, where Parkur isn't so lonely [/me]

It is updated, but Parkur is still on his own
Though he isn't the only one outside the green area anymore

[KangarooGirl]

I'm on top of Akonyl.
[me=hopelessidiot]flees from Kleene[/me]

[kyuuketsuki]

this test is also garbage, some of the questions are so loaded.

I think some of the questions are a bit too simplified. There were several where I had to guess at the interpretation, but based on the shades of grey would have given very different answers.

I agree with both of these.

Er... that is the whole point. Its the same as personality tests and psych evals. They WANT you to interpret them in your way, which determines your personal answer.

What I'm talking about are questions like: "A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies." That question is designed to draw out a specific answer (you're suppose to answer against it, but they count a number of the 'famous' people on the compass as being in favor of it).

I think as far as your statement is concerned, I have to choose "Strongly Disagree", and "Strongly Agree" with kyuu and what Jd- said ("As for the similarity of the results: I did expect them to be fairly similar overall (as anime in general attracts a certain audience, but especially this series)").

And, most notably, to that statement you quoted, I actually answered Strongly Agree, IIRC

For that quote... Some will strongly agree, with the thought that if monopolies are possible it restricts the abilility for smaller companies to come up and be competitive with larger corporations (which is fair for some people). But what about those people who are FOR large multinational corporations, or who grew up in countries where that works. Likely they'll disagree on the grounds that by restricting monopolies you are denying a good company its dues, and if the smaller companies were any good, then they would pose a threat to and remove the monopoly from the monopoly holder (which again is a fair view depending on how you were brought up, where you lived and how multinational companies affected you).

For that question, most people in middle to lower class will strongly disagree because it means that prices will likely be driven up because of the possibility of lack of competition. However someone in the upper middle to upper class will more than likely agree, because they don't care and they likely believe the strongest survive. And they won't be affected by one company being in control of everything... Just think of how Bill Gates's children would answer compared to the children of a small software company that is just getting by. The former WANTS the monopoly the latter wants monopolies to be outlawed (which at the present time they are, because of the effect on the majority of the general public). However, both their arguments are EQUALLY valid. Just how the arguments against certain stores opening in cities is valid because of the ability to drive down prices compared to small businesses will destroy them (same concept, and this happened multiple times with Walmart in NYC, who are still trying to get in, but are constantly being denied... However... to be fair... to deny them for THAT reason is unfair to Walmart, who would be able to increase their revenue many fold by opening in NYC.)

For the record, I am against monopolies. I think there should be laws that allow for the highest amount of competition (I really think we need anti-lawsuit laws that prevent companies from suing for anti-competitive purposes) In doing so it allows for the most innovation and the best scenario for the general consumer, which I am (again, that whole upbringing and socioeconmic standing issue thing, where I am choosing based on personal opinion and best scenario for myself and my interests). I also chose merely "agree" for that question because SOME monopolies ARE beneficial for the general consumer, the majority are not though.

[Kirbypepe]

So here are my coordinates:
Eco: -3.12
Soc: -1.90

[Callid]

this test is also garbage, some of the questions are so loaded.

I think some of the questions are a bit too simplified. There were several where I had to guess at the interpretation, but based on the shades of grey would have given very different answers.

I agree with both of these.

Er... that is the whole point. Its the same as personality tests and psych evals. They WANT you to interpret them in your way, which determines your personal answer.

What I'm talking about are questions like: "A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies." That question is designed to draw out a specific answer (you're suppose to answer against it, but they count a number of the 'famous' people on the compass as being in favor of it).

I think as far as your statement is concerned, I have to choose "Strongly Disagree", and "Strongly Agree" with kyuu and what Jd- said ("As for the similarity of the results: I did expect them to be fairly similar overall (as anime in general attracts a certain audience, but especially this series)").

And, most notably, to that statement you quoted, I actually answered Strongly Agree, IIRC

For that quote... Some will strongly agree, with the thought that if monopolies are possible it restricts the abilility for smaller companies to come up and be competitive with larger corporations (which is fair for some people). But what about those people who are FOR large multinational corporations, or who grew up in countries where that works. Likely they'll disagree on the grounds that by restricting monopolies you are denying a good company its dues, and if the smaller companies were any good, then they would pose a threat to and remove the monopoly from the monopoly holder (which again is a fair view depending on how you were brought up, where you lived and how multinational companies affected you).

For that question, most people in middle to lower class will strongly disagree because it means that prices will likely be driven up because of the possibility of lack of competition. However someone in the upper middle to upper class will more than likely agree, because they don't care and they likely believe the strongest survive. And they won't be affected by one company being in control of everything... Just think of how Bill Gates's children would answer compared to the children of a small software company that is just getting by. The former WANTS the monopoly the latter wants monopolies to be outlawed (which at the present time they are, because of the effect on the majority of the general public). However, both their arguments are EQUALLY valid. Just how the arguments against certain stores opening in cities is valid because of the ability to drive down prices compared to small businesses will destroy them (same concept, and this happened multiple times with Walmart in NYC, who are still trying to get in, but are constantly being denied... However... to be fair... to deny them for THAT reason is unfair to Walmart, who would be able to increase their revenue many fold by opening in NYC.)

For the record, I am against monopolies. I think there should be laws that allow for the highest amount of competition (I really think we need anti-lawsuit laws that prevent companies from suing for anti-competitive purposes) In doing so it allows for the most innovation and the best scenario for the general consumer, which I am (again, that whole upbringing and socioeconmic standing issue thing, where I am choosing based on personal opinion and best scenario for myself and my interests). I also chose merely "agree" for that question because SOME monopolies ARE beneficial for the general consumer, the majority are not though.

So, you argue that there are different positions to this questions, because different people hold different opinions? Isn't that exactly contradicting your own statement earlier, that the question is supposed to draw a specific answer? Furthermore, if the test would really be designed to get people to disagree with that quote, then we had all ended up on the wrong side - clearly enough, disagreeing with the quote (and therefore being against free market restrictions) would be Right; yet we are all (except Parkur) Left

EDIT: Oops. Quote miscounting
Mixed up dilbert's and kyuu's earlier posts -.-

[Aokochan]

My results:
eco: -4.88
Soc:-3.28

[Kor]

this test is also garbage, some of the questions are so loaded.

I think some of the questions are a bit too simplified. There were several where I had to guess at the interpretation, but based on the shades of grey would have given very different answers.

I agree with both of these.

Er... that is the whole point. Its the same as personality tests and psych evals. They WANT you to interpret them in your way, which determines your personal answer.

What I'm talking about are questions like: "A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies." That question is designed to draw out a specific answer (you're suppose to answer against it, but they count a number of the 'famous' people on the compass as being in favor of it).

I think as far as your statement is concerned, I have to choose "Strongly Disagree", and "Strongly Agree" with kyuu and what Jd- said ("As for the similarity of the results: I did expect them to be fairly similar overall (as anime in general attracts a certain audience, but especially this series)").

And, most notably, to that statement you quoted, I actually answered Strongly Agree, IIRC

For that quote... Some will strongly agree, with the thought that if monopolies are possible it restricts the abilility for smaller companies to come up and be competitive with larger corporations (which is fair for some people). But what about those people who are FOR large multinational corporations, or who grew up in countries where that works. Likely they'll disagree on the grounds that by restricting monopolies you are denying a good company its dues, and if the smaller companies were any good, then they would pose a threat to and remove the monopoly from the monopoly holder (which again is a fair view depending on how you were brought up, where you lived and how multinational companies affected you).

For that question, most people in middle to lower class will strongly disagree because it means that prices will likely be driven up because of the possibility of lack of competition. However someone in the upper middle to upper class will more than likely agree, because they don't care and they likely believe the strongest survive. And they won't be affected by one company being in control of everything... Just think of how Bill Gates's children would answer compared to the children of a small software company that is just getting by. The former WANTS the monopoly the latter wants monopolies to be outlawed (which at the present time they are, because of the effect on the majority of the general public). However, both their arguments are EQUALLY valid. Just how the arguments against certain stores opening in cities is valid because of the ability to drive down prices compared to small businesses will destroy them (same concept, and this happened multiple times with Walmart in NYC, who are still trying to get in, but are constantly being denied... However... to be fair... to deny them for THAT reason is unfair to Walmart, who would be able to increase their revenue many fold by opening in NYC.)

For the record, I am against monopolies. I think there should be laws that allow for the highest amount of competition (I really think we need anti-lawsuit laws that prevent companies from suing for anti-competitive purposes) In doing so it allows for the most innovation and the best scenario for the general consumer, which I am (again, that whole upbringing and socioeconmic standing issue thing, where I am choosing based on personal opinion and best scenario for myself and my interests). I also chose merely "agree" for that question because SOME monopolies ARE beneficial for the general consumer, the majority are not though.

So, you argue that there are different positions to this questions, because different people hold different opinions? Isn't that exactly contradicting your own statement earlier, that the question is supposed to draw a specific answer? Furthermore, if the test would really be designed to get people to disagree with that quote, then we had all ended up on the wrong side - clearly enough, disagreeing with the quote (and therefore being against free market restrictions) would be Right; yet we are all (except Parkur) Left

I think you are mixing up between Kyuu's post and Dilbert's post.

[Akonyl]

I think you are mixing up between Kyuu's post and Dilbert's post.

he's crossing the streams!

[Callid]

I think you are mixing up between Kyuu's post and Dilbert's post.

he's crossing the streams!

Oops. Quote miscounting

[Abs.]

[me=Abs.]awaits update, where Parkur isn't so lonely [/me]

It is updated, but Parkur is still on his own
Though he isn't the only one outside the green area anymore

Apparently some aren't PMing you their results then

[dilbertschalter]

this test is also garbage, some of the questions are so loaded.

I think some of the questions are a bit too simplified. There were several where I had to guess at the interpretation, but based on the shades of grey would have given very different answers.

I agree with both of these.

Er... that is the whole point. Its the same as personality tests and psych evals. They WANT you to interpret them in your way, which determines your personal answer.

What I'm talking about are questions like: "A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies." That question is designed to draw out a specific answer (you're suppose to answer against it, but they count a number of the 'famous' people on the compass as being in favor of it).

I think as far as your statement is concerned, I have to choose "Strongly Disagree", and "Strongly Agree" with kyuu and what Jd- said ("As for the similarity of the results: I did expect them to be fairly similar overall (as anime in general attracts a certain audience, but especially this series)").

And, most notably, to that statement you quoted, I actually answered Strongly Agree, IIRC

For that quote... Some will strongly agree, with the thought that if monopolies are possible it restricts the abilility for smaller companies to come up and be competitive with larger corporations (which is fair for some people). But what about those people who are FOR large multinational corporations, or who grew up in countries where that works. Likely they'll disagree on the grounds that by restricting monopolies you are denying a good company its dues, and if the smaller companies were any good, then they would pose a threat to and remove the monopoly from the monopoly holder (which again is a fair view depending on how you were brought up, where you lived and how multinational companies affected you).

For that question, most people in middle to lower class will strongly disagree because it means that prices will likely be driven up because of the possibility of lack of competition. However someone in the upper middle to upper class will more than likely agree, because they don't care and they likely believe the strongest survive. And they won't be affected by one company being in control of everything... Just think of how Bill Gates's children would answer compared to the children of a small software company that is just getting by. The former WANTS the monopoly the latter wants monopolies to be outlawed (which at the present time they are, because of the effect on the majority of the general public). However, both their arguments are EQUALLY valid. Just how the arguments against certain stores opening in cities is valid because of the ability to drive down prices compared to small businesses will destroy them (same concept, and this happened multiple times with Walmart in NYC, who are still trying to get in, but are constantly being denied... However... to be fair... to deny them for THAT reason is unfair to Walmart, who would be able to increase their revenue many fold by opening in NYC.)

For the record, I am against monopolies. I think there should be laws that allow for the highest amount of competition (I really think we need anti-lawsuit laws that prevent companies from suing for anti-competitive purposes) In doing so it allows for the most innovation and the best scenario for the general consumer, which I am (again, that whole upbringing and socioeconmic standing issue thing, where I am choosing based on personal opinion and best scenario for myself and my interests). I also chose merely "agree" for that question because SOME monopolies ARE beneficial for the general consumer, the majority are not though.

you don't need to include "predator" in the question though... you might as well ask "do you support the ability of evil companies to do x, y or z?"well designed surveys (just look at any legitimate poll put out by an independent organization) don't ask questions that include such language.

[Callid]

[me=Abs.]awaits update, where Parkur isn't so lonely [/me]

It is updated, but Parkur is still on his own
Though he isn't the only one outside the green area anymore

Apparently some aren't PMing you their results then

Well, can't do anything about that. I was speaking of Moho, BTW.

[ProfParanoia]

-10 ~ Economy
10 ~ Social

[Cider]

I'm just sitting here necro-ing this old thread