Cade wrote:
danlo wrote:
I put below 110, just to average it out. Fact is, most of you all are probably unintentionally lying, letting your egocentricity interfere and thinking you're smarter than you are. If we were to get a true stat, we should probably normalize the stats and put everyone one class lower than what they voted.
Sorry danlo, I'm honestly not trying to harrass you but you keep saying things I find mindbogglingly nonsensical. And this particular comment is as pretentious, sanctimonious and cynical as it is ridiculous. Egocentricism may lead to "unintentional lying" but it can leads to faux humility too. I think you're just not feeling sporty because of the suggestion there are people here with a higher score than you.
It's quite alright, Cade. I am, however, interested to know what other things I've said that you find mindbogglingly nonsensical. It is a well-known problem with statistical gathering of data that people will tend to score themselves either higher or lower than their actual score. Especially when people can view the distribution of the dataset before they vote. Either they will be lower or higher than the mean of the dataset, and score themselves closer to that mean than they actually are. Or they will deem themselves smarter than they scored, for a myriad of possible reasons, hence scaling their scores up one percentile. Although you find it pretentious, sanctimonous, cynical and ridiculous, it is unfortunately what happens with surveys that are as prone to subjectivity as this.
If you were at all familiar with my postings, you should know I harbour no false delusions about my own failings and weaknesses. I, myself, am prone to the second pitfall of hubris. I consider myself a lot more intelligent than I probably am, and I would doubtless scale my score up a percentile, if not more. I can even tell you what premises I would use to justify it. Personally, I don't think there is a person here I would consider my better.