• 0 Posts
  • 22 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 22nd, 2023

help-circle
  • FunctionFn@feddit.nltoAsklemmyWhats your such opinion
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    11 months ago

    No, the test itself is definitely the problem. Regardless of whether you believe a personality type test can be effective, the MBTI is particularly and provably ineffective in just about every measurable way:

    It’s not reliable. It has terrible test-retest reliability. If I’m X personality type, I shouldn’t test as X type one time, and Y type the next, and Z 6 months laters.

    It’s not predictive. If a personality test accurately judges someone, it should mean you now know something about someone’s behaviours, and can extrapolate that forwards and predict behavioural trends. MBTI does not.

    It fundamentally doesn’t match the data. MBTI relies upon the idea that people fall neatly into binary buckets (introverted vs extroverted, thinking vs feeling, etc). But the majority of people don’t, and test with MBTI scores close to the line the test draws, following a normal distribution. So the line separating two sides of a bell curve ends up being arbitrary.

    And finally, it’s pushed very hard by the Myers-Briggs foundation, and not at all by independent scientific bodies. copying straight from wikipedia:

    Most of the research supporting the MBTI’s validity has been produced by the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, an organization run by the Myers–Briggs Foundation, and published in the center’s own journal, the Journal of Psychological Type (JPT),





  • In the US (which I’m assuming you’re referring to, since the meme mentions the GOP), There is absolutely not a background check performed for every firearm purchase. That’s one of many restrictions people reasonably want placed on guns. Only 17 states have a universal requirement for gun sales. The federal law “requiring” background checks only applies to federally licensed sales. Private sales, gun shows, etc. allow for sale of guns with no background check, and often bypass age restrictions as well.



  • You’re the one failing to understand. I’m drawing an inference about how you treated them before and during the interaction you’re complaining about, based on how you’re speaking about them after the fact. I’m saying that the fact that you’re willing to dismiss people as “not particularly smart” after a single interaction is very indicative of you being generally judgemental and rude, traits that will increase the probability that people will be disrespectful to you. This second comment of yours has only further convinced me.


  • You say you’re not disrespecting their expertise or opinions…while in the same breath, calling them “not particularly smart or competent or educated.” Even if, from your point of view, those things are factually true, the fact that you describe people that way makes it instantly clear to me why you’re being disrespected. Maybe that makes me a normie, or “better socialized”, but I wouldn’t be surprised if you were (intentionally or not) disrespecting those “normies” first. I’ve grown up around people who talk like you do, and I’ve seen the responses they get for their actions, rightfully so.


  • IDK about the person you’re responding to, but

    who actually lives there or who practices the religion.

    There are a lot of Jews that don’t fit into either of those categories. Ethnic and cultural Jewish people that don’t practice or believe in Judaism as a religion are very common. I call myself Jewish, because my mother and my grandmother are Jewish, but I don’t practice the religion. I’d recommend googling Jewish Atheism and Jewish Secularism for more info.







  • You don’t really lower a target’s AC, it usually stays constant. The AC is just the number you have to roll against to hit.

    Ie, you roll a 10 on a d20. You have a bonus of +8 to hit. That means you’ll hit the enemy as long as it’s AC is 18 or lower.

    Saving throws are the reverse. The enemy who’s getting targeted by a spell gets to roll and add their save bonus to try and beat your spell DC, which is usually somewhere from 15-20 ish.

    You don’t really need to know the maths going on, it’s all represented by the % chance that pops up when you go to target something. If a hit says 95% chance, that means you’ll hit as long as you don’t roll a 1 on a d20.

    As for Karlach’s AC, that’s just a barbarian thing. Barbarians are usually unarmored, but they get to add their Con stat to their AC as well as their Dex. They have a lot more HP to make up for getting hit more often, and they resist all physical damage while raging so they’re still quite tanky despite having a lower AC.






  • I’m only responding to the assertion that asking “what cis women think about playing trans women” is morally equivalent to asking racists whether they want to play against black people.

    But I think this part is where the disconnect is happening. Before this decision, cis women and trans women were both components of women’s chess. The act of conferring with only a subset of that group implies that the other does not fall into that category. Relying only on the majority group’s opinion on the status of the minority group is itself an assumption that one of the groups inherently belongs less than the other.