The test...

[Levekius]

I took M.J Young's test about 15 minutes ago.
I know, I know. This test has been out there for a long time, but somehow I never had the time to check it out before.

I thought the test was maybe a bit awkward. And also very short. Maybe too much so.

It's also my understanding that the test is not endorsed by everybody. I heard that Ron, for one, didn't like it much.

My question has nothing to do with the test (although feel free to comment it if you wish so).

Rather, I'd like to know if it would be POSSIBLE to design another one ? And has anybody tried ?

It sure seems like it would be a useful tool to me. I am fairly sure of my D/F/K inclinations.

I have more problem with my G/N/S inclinations. That's if I have any. I remain a bit skeptic of the threefold model, maybe because I have trouble grasping it, or maybe because I don't know enough about myself.

Anyway, what better place than The Forge to design such a test ? If it can't be done here, I doubt it will be done elsewhere properly.

[Ron Edwards]

I am strongly opposed to any such test, and my outlook is independent of the issues I have with M.J.'s actual test.

The reason is that such tests are about what the person "would" do. They are very much like surveys about infidelity or exit polls from movie releases - you get what people want you to think about them, not what they actually do. I do not think our verbal, social interface of communication lends itself well to exposing behavior. To the contrary.

I also think that one's degree of self-deception in this regard is extremely high, such that even the best of intentions are subject to the problems above.

Various psychological and social surveys have acknowledged the point of view I'm expressing, in that they now ask about what the person has actually done, rather than what they "would" do or "would" think. They also employ binary options within the question rather than vague spectra. Classroom evaluations of the professor are now built on the same model - "Did the professor face the class when speaking," rather than "Was the instructor clear?"

Recently I used a martial arts analogy, stating that what a person SAYS about his or her style or goals of sparring (for instance) is widely and accurately considered to be piffle. There is really only one way to find out - to spar with them.

Similarly, one should role-play as per usual and evaluate either oneself or one's fellow players (in the broad sense, including the GM) from those experiences. Any time and effort that would be spent in composing or taking some test is more effectively spent that way.

Best,
Ron