On June 08 2017 21:01 Baalim wrote:
This town is too small for 2 locos... draw your weapons
I was so confused when he made that account. He knew me as iG.Loco on broodwar and obviously he saw the name was taken when he created his LP account and I'm pretty sure he had seen me posting regularly. Anyway, I'll gladly take a name change. I chose my StarCraft name when I was a kid before I was even in high school.
Btw I redid the test (I had done the test a few weeks back and didn't remember the results to post them here) and we have the exact same results for agreeableness and neuroticism. My openness to experience is at 85% which surprised me because I associated that mostly with a need for variety in life and I'm a person with a simple constant routine. But it makes sense when I think more about it, it's not a "wide" openness, it's more narrow because I'm also low in extroversion which limits my options for adventure. There were quite a few questions on art and philosophy which I'm very open to so that explains it. Honestly this test is just just way too short and repetitive though.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
1
the cleaner Germany. Jun 09 2017 18:59. Posts 3014
On June 08 2017 21:01 Baalim wrote:
This town is too small for 2 locos... draw your weapons
I was so confused when he made that account. He knew me as iG.Loco on broodwar and obviously he saw the name was taken when he created his LP account and I'm pretty sure he had seen me posting regularly. Anyway, I'll gladly take a name change. I chose my StarCraft name when I was a kid before I was even in high school.
Btw I redid the test (I had done the test a few weeks back and didn't remember the results to post them here) and we have the exact same results for agreeableness and neuroticism. My openness to experience is at 85% which surprised me because I associated that mostly with a need for variety in life and I'm a person with a simple constant routine. But it makes sense when I think more about it, it's not a "wide" openness, it's more narrow because I'm also low in extroversion which limits my options for adventure. There were quite a few questions on art and philosophy which I'm very open to so that explains it. Honestly this test is just just way too short and repetitive though.
I liked your nickname back in iG! The reason I made mine in poker was because I was gonna play super nitty and wanted people to not give me credit. It has played to my disadvantage as time went on. Not sure if I was aware that you carried the same name to poker though, probably was hoping you wouldnt, my bad!
bitte bitte bitte bitte bitte bitte
1
Stroggoz New Zealand. Jun 10 2017 06:19. Posts 5296
pseudo psychology 93%
One of 3 non decent human beings on a site of 5 people with between 2-3 decent human beings
Really you guys dont think that a nickname can have any influence in some peoples decisions? Sure it shouldnt influence us pros, but on droolers I think its a given. Maybe not my nickname specifically, but just ask Spewtard, wish I came up with that one.
On June 07 2017 08:01 Baalim wrote:
you had to one-up everybody didnt you?
Only if you judge having a Brave New World, Fordist/soma-induced type of personality a superior one.
Personally, I don't buy the reliability of his results or his explanation. No matter how stoic you've become through poker, it's still just one variable: money. There are so many other variables in day to day life that can affect your mood. You'd have to be mentally incapacitated in some way to be constantly shielded from so-called negative emotions.
On June 07 2017 08:01 Baalim wrote:
you had to one-up everybody didnt you?
Only if you judge having a Brave New World, Fordist/soma-induced type of personality a superior one.
Personally, I don't buy the reliability of his results or his explanation. No matter how stoic you've become through poker, it's still just one variable: money. There are so many other variables in day to day life that can affect your mood. You'd have to be mentally incapacitated in some way to be constantly shielded from so-called negative emotions.
On June 07 2017 08:01 Baalim wrote:
you had to one-up everybody didnt you?
Only if you judge having a Brave New World, Fordist/soma-induced type of personality a superior one.
Personally, I don't buy the reliability of his results or his explanation. No matter how stoic you've become through poker, it's still just one variable: money. There are so many other variables in day to day life that can affect your mood. You'd have to be mentally incapacitated in some way to be constantly shielded from so-called negative emotions.
You know, the guy who can block out fear and stress to the point of being able to climb 3000 foot walls without a rope.
I'm not certain but I dont think daredevil activities are linked with low neuroticism
"Neuroticism is one of the Big Five higher-order personality traits in the study of psychology. Individuals who score high on neuroticism are more likely than average to be moody and to experience such feelings as anxiety, worry, fear, anger, frustration, envy, jealousy, guilt, depressed mood, and loneliness."
Alex shows little to no amygdala activity when given stimuli that excite or disturb other individuals. The amygdala has a primary function in emotional response. So he is able to control everything even when put in impossible situations that others cannot comprehend.
There should be a high correlation between specifically his brain and a lack of neuroticism.
He also surveyed high in premeditation, his typical modus operandi, and very low in neuroticism, making him unlikely to ruminate over unlikely outcomes or risks that are impossible to manage. “If you don’t have any fear to begin with,” Honnold says, “there’s a lot less to control.”
Yet he has higher than some people in this thread. I think having 0% is answering untruthfully or the sign of an improperly functioning brain in some way.
NewbSaibot: 18 TIMES THE SPEED OF LIGHT. Because FUCK YOU, Daut
the test is ridiculously short that will give bad results, I wonder if its just him (Alex) in paticular of a traint in dare-devil personalities, I've known a lot of people in rallying and obv most fall in the dare-devil type but some do seem neurotic
Ex-PokerStars Team Pro Online
1
vasoline73 United States. Jun 13 2017 05:10. Posts 808
Your score for openness was 65%. This is in the moderate range.
Your score for conscientiousness was low, at 45%.
Your score for Extraversion was moderate, at 50%.
Your score for Agreeableness was moderate, at 63%.
Your score for Neuroticism was moderate, at 43%.
Wish I was a little less agreeable in life and perhaps more open.
On June 13 2017 04:29 Loco wrote:
Being more agreeable = being more of a pushover. It really isn't quite as great as most people think it is.
Of the people I know that have scored high in agreeableness its an actual issue and they want to be less agreeable, and I dont know anyone that scores low that wants to be more agreeable
I seriously don't understand how everyone scores so low on neuroticism heh
One of my problems with this test is that I'd probably not give the same answers twice in a row.
The opinion one has for himself is prob not truthful or solid enough not to change a few hours later (eg after eating a meal)
Or I'm just too neurotic -_-
new shit has come to light... a-and... shit! man...
On June 13 2017 04:29 Loco wrote:
Being more agreeable = being more of a pushover. It really isn't quite as great as most people think it is.
Of the people I know that have scored high in agreeableness its an actual issue and they want to be less agreeable, and I dont know anyone that scores low that wants to be more agreeable
I don't either, people I know want to stick to what they know is best for them and not be influenced by the status quo, marketers, etc... but I mean, those who say they want to be more agreeable probably think that due to a misunderstanding of the trait (they think it's inherently positive and makes life better). They don't realize its dangers. In reality, it just makes it harder to be a healthy, self-disciplined individual.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
On June 13 2017 12:16 lebowski wrote:
I seriously don't understand how everyone scores so low on neuroticism heh
One of my problems with this test is that I'd probably not give the same answers twice in a row.
The opinion one has for himself is prob not truthful or solid enough not to change a few hours later (eg after eating a meal)
Or I'm just too neurotic -_-
I think I would rank much higher if I wasn't living my life how I want it now. The fact that it's that low is just because I structured my life in a way that makes it hard for me to have mood swings. I probably would never rank mid-high to high but if I had to play poker for a living for instance it would be completely different, I would be frustrated frequently and it would bleed into other aspects of my life as it used to.
I dunno about the others but I did the test a few times and my neuroticism stayed low and I'm being as objective as I can. A good indicator that I'm objective (I think) is that for instance, despite living with my girlfriend and being together pretty much all day every day, in the last 5 years I haven't yelled or gotten really angry at her once, except one time where, funnily enough, I actually forced myself to do so to calm her down. My girlfriend was actually annoyed that I never got visibly upset about anything and she started to use it against me. (She'd made passive-aggressive remarks about how I'm detached from things and how I must have been feeling superior to her who gets upset frequently). So one day where she was having one of her awful days, she angrily (but accidentally) did something that seemed like it could have physically hurt me, but I was fine. I used it as an opportunity to show her I wasn't detached. I acted as if she had physically hurt me and powerfully/angrily pushed away the thing she had shoved into me and yelled at her. I didn't feel angry and I knew I was acting convincingly but she got scared and calmed down immediately and never did this again. Usually it would take her a while to calm herself down on her own. I wasn't conscious of it at the time but I remembered it was something that I think Epictetus recommended you do in this kind of scenario where someone abuses your tranquil nature and I had never had the opportunity to try it before that. The next day my girlfriend basically said she had never known I had this kind of anger inside of me and she didn't want to trigger it by acting carelessly now.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
Even if that sounds manipulative I think its important to even act it as you did, I think in relationships when someone is considerably more moody than the other they feel like their partner is detached and will probe over and over to get a reaction, perhaps is not really that they feel you are detached but they feel inadequate unless you show "flaws" in that regard like they do.
It seems to be manipulative, but I think it's the opposite: the person who is being passive-aggressive is the one trying to manipulate you. They want to bring you down to their level, for lack of a better explanation. Their self-esteem has been hurt because you seem to be "above it all" and they aren't. My reaction was not calculated and it wasn't like common manipulation which is selfish, I just felt annoyed at the time and simply exaggerated my feelings to defuse the situation so that both of us would benefit from it.
fuck I should just sell some of my Pokemon cards, if no one stakes that is what I will have to do - lostaccount
United States. Jun 10 2017 17:46. Posts 8955
