Welcome beta testers! - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Co-ordination of all publishing projects.

Moderator: Administrators PoFo

User avatar
By Demosthenes
#13784779
Thanks so much for you time and patience.

While the test is at beta, it will take just a day or two to make it ready. dgun has finished the coding, but I need to make some changes from there so hang tight, and look for the start up thread soon!
User avatar
By HoniSoit
#13784813
Thanks for asking me to help out with the beta testing, and again thanks so very much for you and dgun's great work to bring it about. Really looking forward to the quiz itself.
#13784873
Ok gentleman here is a first look to whet your appetites. I think Honi may have seen this already, so it may not be news to him.

http://quiz.polisick.com/pfquiz.php

Just skip the demographic questions. A map will go in to pinpoint your location worldwide, which will be used later for various stats.

Also understand the compasses aren't fully set up, I will begin working on correcting that soon, but those of you familiar with the original eight axes will see that these have been implemented, though they will soon be re-arranged to suit the new format a little better.

Some notes on the new test:

1) The new quiz will allow a user to elect to take up to four "modules" or individual compasses (compasi?) that each contain a three-axis measurement. Those include (for now) an economic, ethical, moral, and a governance (I'm not sure that's the best term for this, I'm considering just changing it to "political") compass at this time.

2) Each axis contains 10 questions on a standard five answer multiple choice quiz. No opinion answers are simply not scored. At this time there are a total of 11 available questions for each axis.

3) If you elect to take all four compasses, you will have a quiz of 120 questions. If you elect to take thee, you'll have 90 questions, 60 for two, and 30 for one compass.

4) The questions occur in random order on any given quiz. If you take 120 questions, all compasses and axes will be lumped together.

5) Although the results haven't been written yet, eventually you'll receive a placement and raw score output on your quiz based on your answers. We will provide results (hopefully) that will link the test taker to some international political body or organization, and perhaps even align them with where they fall philosophically. For now, all that is there is the raw score and we want to make sure all that works alright before we begin coming up with stances for various organizations.

Feel free to ask questions in the meantime, and keep in mind the above link is only a taste, for now.
User avatar
By dgun
#13785007
Thanks to all the beta testers for volunteering their time to this effort.

Just to add something to what Demo said, you can take the test as an anonymous user or you can create an account on the test forum and log in to take the test. We need it tested both ways.

Please report whatever issues you run into as this is very much a work in progress; and of course all suggestions are welcome and encouraged.

The way the scoring works is that everyone is assumed dead center of an axis to start with and moves along an axis in either direction as they answer questions. 'No Opinion' does not move the test taker either way. I realize that this is not 100% perfect way of handling it, but I think it is about as reasonable as we can get and keep the complexity manageable. Besides, 10 questions should be enough to gauge pretty well where someone falls on that axis.

And as Demo mentioned the compass sores have not been calculated yet. At the moment we're just printing each axis score. I'm working to implement that now.

Demo has thanked me like a 100 times :lol: but I would like take this opportunity to thank him for all the effort he has put behind this project. He has really been the one to champion the cause and has spent many hours on the quiz questions.

And now that we have expanded our team to include you guys, we should be able to make some serious progress over the coming weeks (months, years? :lol: :| ).

Thanks again guys for all your help.
User avatar
By dgun
#13785107
I'm sorry to report that there has been a pretty big problem tonight.

One of the tables got zapped somehow. Not sure why yet. I have a backup but I still lost 2 hours of work. :*(

So until I correct the issue no one will be able to test the quiz.
#13785111
It might be my fault dgun... see my pm, I got to messing around and I think we lost all the questions... :eek:

:?:

:*(
User avatar
By Drlee
#13785130
Is it OK to use now?
#13785327
HoniSoit wrote:Is there any specific instruction for the testers, dgun and Demo?

Are we supposed to do it now, or wait for the go-head from you?


I'm sorry for the lack of clarity there guys. Last night threw us off a little.

At this time if you'd like to contribute you can review my post in the "As it stands now" thread and make any and all suggestions you'd like to make.

You'll note W01f is already on the case down there. What I need is feedback in this particular format:

Moral Compass
X/Y Axis
Question 6:

"List question"

This question seems to be too vague, and doesn't really measure what the Axis seems to imply we need to measure.

Solution: "Blah, blah, blah, blah"


This gives us specifics we can deal with. Also note, I've been looking at these a very long time. You guys have fresh eyes and minds. I'm happy to entertain all criticisms of all questions, but I really need to you to also submit your solutions. Even if you suggest we totally throw out a question! Please, just supply us with something to replace it with! :D

There is also a special project in the works along these lines as well. It would probably be best if just one person took this on: I need a complete review of the Free Trade axis. My fear is that everyone is going to either be 10 or -10, I'm not sure there is any middle ground built into this axis. If you read dgun's scoring method you know you start in the middle of a line and progress up or down based on your answers. My fear is that the questions on this axis are all about the same thing. You either like protectionism or you're a free trader. I need that reviewed badly to get other opinions. Here are my thoughts on this axis:

1) It's not fixable. You either are or you're not a Free Trader or Protectionist, and it's only somewhat relevant anyway so scrap it all and go in another direction.

2) It isn't correct as it stands now but with some tweaking we can make it work.

3) With some minor tweaking we can just leave it alone and do nothing else to it. Max had this axis in his original quiz, which is our model, So if it ain't broke don't fix it.

The issue for me with this axis is that I just personally don't care all that much about it. It's a bourgeois axis completely and one has to assume from the jump that one buys into bourgeois politics. This means I have a hard time finding a way to step the questions up and down as we have been able to do in other axes. Taking the Marxists axis as an example, it's easy to see how someone might score a +2 or -2 on that one because of the increasing and decreasing intensity of the Marxism in the questions.

Another project: I need someone to review the various compasses, and the axis they contain.

1) Do they make sense?
2) Would one axis seem more logical elsewhere?
3) What would you do differently?
4) Do you even like the "module" format we've gone with?
5) Do you think most users will take the whole test anyway?
6) Will casual users appreciate the concession to them?
7) Anything else you observe?

Thanks again gentlemen. It appears that all but one of you are here. I have not yet heard back from Fasces. I'm assuming he will be more than willing to help us out. If so, there will be four of you total.
#13785337
I've copied the questions into a Word document tht I'm going through at the moment, Demo...although actually what I'm doing is procrastinating for England when I should be getting on with two 5000-word essays I'm supposed to be writing for my Postgrad Dip Ed.
:hmm:

When I allow myself short breaks, I'll be having a scan. One quick one: I was interested to see that the question from Maxim's day regarding the 'From each according to his ability to each according to his need' has been switched around. Previously it had been followed by, '...is fundamentally a good idea', whereas now it's, '...is fundamentally a flawed idea'. Was this deliberate and what was the rationale? Do you ask the same question, but weight it the other way, somewhere else in the quiz?
#13785360
Wow! Thanks Cart, that's great.

To answer your question about the Marxist question:

Honisoit and Potemkin wrote that axis. In each axis I have spent time trying to make one half the questions biased one way, and the other half the other. Of course, because there are currently and odd number of questions it's not perfect, but that was the point of changing the question you've pointed out. To give non-marxists a sense that the axis wasn't written to try and make then marxists.

Let me know if you have something else in mind.

Also, if it will help you guys, I can separate the axes or compasses into their own threads for easier hunting and finding and so forth. Having them all together is handy, but at times when someone mentions 1 question out of 132... it's tough to locate them easily.
#13785447
OK. Only 850 words done out of my first 5000-word essay, but hey...I've had a 'butcher's' at the new quiz... :D

As an overarching observation, given that it is scored by deviation from a neutral centre-line (same way we score candidates for selection to the airforce, as it happens) then to an extent if the reader doesn't understand the question it doesn't really matter. I struggled with some of the Prot vs Free Trade stuff because it was (about 93 million miles) over my head. Furthermore, in some areas (mostly those I'm bringing to your attention here) the questions are too long-winded, which seems to me to be an attempt to ensure understanding but which actually mitigate against understanding due to their length. I have suggested alternatives. If I have failed to incorporate a key point in my suggested edit, please let me know what it was for my own reference. ;)


In Protectionist vs Free Trade

1) It is sometimes necessary to erect trade barriers around hostile or unconcerned foreign imports, despite a larger belief in the virtues of a free market.

Delete, ‘despite a larger belief in the virtues of a free market’. Unnecessary.

2) Your nation can sell blue jeans for prices between $20-$25 per pair. Foreign competition can do so for $10 if allowed to enter the country at free market rates. However, this would eventually force your domestic jean makers to go out of business. In this case, some kind of import tax on the foreign made jeans is not only necessary but patriotic.

Too long...

2) Foreign nations can produce goods at half the price of your nation. If they were allowed free access to your market, this would force your manufacturers out of business. In this case, some kind of import tax on the foreign goods is not only necessary but patriotic.

3) Economics Nobel prize winner and trade theorist Paul Krugman once famously stated that, "If there were an Economist’s Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade'." In considering this quote of Krugman's, you generally...

Maybe there is merit in subliminal education, but do you need to attribute the quote? Why not just have...

"If there were an Economist’s Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade'."

4) Your nation is developing its industrial capacity. However, you cannot compete with the prices of foreign made goods due to serious inequities in the labor market abroad. In order to compete and build your domestic capacity, it is only reasonable to raise tariffs on the foreign industrial produced goods that can be sold in your nation.

5) One way a government should protect its domestic markets is through the use of the import tariff.

Er...4) and 5) appear to be repeats of 2)...

6) Should your nation base it's foreign policy on the fact that, according to Herman Daly, Ricardo's Theory of Comparative Advantage is now obsolete because the new globalization regime causes capital to flow to wherever costs are lowest- that is. As this proves Absolute Advantage as opposed to Comparative Advantage, it is sound foreign policy.

Fuckwit nurse doesn’t understand the question! Is it your intention to weed out fuckwit nurses (and others who don’t understand the question)?

7) The Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union represents a sound policy that keeps Europe’s internal markets strong, and allows them to profit from a production surplus that would otherwise cause such a drop in prices that the entire market would go under. That other developing nations may be harmed by the policy is none of the EU member nations’ concerns.

OK, but unnecessarily long. How about...

7) The Common Agricultural Policy of the European Union represents a sound policy that keeps Europe’s internal markets strong. That other developing nations may be harmed by the policy is none of the EU member nations’ concerns.

8) Adam Smith’s Law of Comparative Advantage states: ”That each member in a group of trading partners should specialize in and produce the goods in which they possess lowest opportunity costs relative to other trading partners. This specialization permits trading partners to then exchange their goods produced as a function of specialization.” Generally speaking, I find this to be true as protectionist states are simply too short sighted to understand and accept the long term gains.

Again, fuckwit nurse doesn’t understand, but even so – why not just bung in the quote without attribution or explanatory caveat?

10) An established economic theory holds that: ’The prosperity of a nation is dependent upon its supply of capital, and that the global volume of international trade is "unchangeable." Economic assets or capital, are represented by bullion (gold, silver, and trade value) held by the state, which is best increased through a positive balance of trade with other nations (exports minus imports) and assumes wealth and monetary assets are identical.’ This theory suggests that the ruling government should advance these goals by playing a protectionist role in the economy; by encouraging exports and discouraging imports, notably through the use of tariffs and subsidies and I agree with this.

‘I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave a few moments ago.’ :?:

In Militaristic vs Pacifistic

6) Everyone needs spligets to live in the modern world, they are simply the engine of human survival. Death Island if the only place in the world that makes functioning, perfect spligets. The government of Death Island selectively sells spligets to its allies very cheaply, but quite clearly makes its money selling them at enormous profit to non-allies, and refuses to sell to its enemies at all. You nation receives spligets at a rate ten times the allied price. A motion is introduced in your parliament to send in an armed force to "negotiate" a better deal with the Death Island government. This force will likely be successful. As an MP in this parliament you would never vote for such an unethical use of force.

Too long-winded. How about...

6) Another nation has resources you need. They sell them to their allies very cheaply, but at enormous profit to non-allies, and refuse to sell to their enemies at all. Your nation pays ten times the allied price. A motion is introduced in your parliament to send in an armed force to "negotiate" a better deal. This force will likely be successful. As an MP in this parliament you would never vote for such an unethical use of force.

7) Your nation has been undergoing covert raids by a hostile neighboring state for many years. The international community will not act because nothing can ever be proven, yet your intelligence agency knows full well from where the attacks originate and that they are carried out by hostile paramilitary forces receiving covert support from their home nation. In order to end the threat forever it will be necessary to completely destroy the home base of this force, a small city of 250,000 people. As the military leader in charge of this force you commit to destroying the threat by any and all means necessary.

OK. A bit long-winded, but nevertheless necessary. Just one observation – change ‘undergoing’ – which implies co-operation – to ‘subject to’, which does not.

8) Several regions of the world contain a majority of the resources you need to keep your own people living the high life. You are duty bound as the nation's current head of state to do whatever it takes on any level to maintain the supply of these resources to your nation at the current cheap prices they've always been obtained for.

Perhaps...

8) The majority of resources the nation needs are in other nations. The nation should do whatever it takes to maintain the supply of these resources.

10) The Bush era phrase "If you're not with me, you are my enemy" lacks the identification of gray areas that are necessary in successful non-military diplomacy.

What’s wrong with just...

“If you’re not with me, you are my enemy.”

11) In a situation where the nation is under constant mid level threat from very low-tech, unorganized, and scattered forces it is appropriate and sensible to attack or forcibly coerce all the nations from which these threats originate (though none are expressly using national origin as a basis for their attacks) into taking steps to stop the creation of these threats, no matter what the underlying cause may be. If these nations do not take the appropriate steps as outlined, it is paramount that all options for military force be exercised to make them take the appropriate steps.

How about...

11) Nations that harbour irregular, guerrilla or terrorist forces with hostile intent towards our nation should be coerced into dealing with the threat and, where they are unable, forced to stand aside and allow external military forces to counter the threat.

In Big Govt vs Small Govt

10) Funding the arts and artists, and giving them the creative space they need to complete their works, provides much needed artistic expression to society at large, where without this funding many artistic projects would never be realized. As a result of this I always support government programs that provide funding these artists.

Seems long-winded. How about...

10) Funding the arts and artists provides much needed artistic expression to society. It is right to support government funding of these artists.

In Individual vs. Social

1) Rugged Individualism should be a way of life that everyone aspires too.

How about either...

1) Rugged Individualism should be a way of life that everyone aspires to.

Or, if you want to be a real Grammar Nazi...( 8) )

1) Rugged Individualism should be a way of life to which everyone aspires.

That's 'bout it on my first read-through.

:D
#13785681
Fasces will be added to the group for now, but will only participate in a limited fashion until his internet issues clear up. Just so that everyone is aware, the roles are assigned as follows:

Beta Testers:

Drlee
W01f
Honisoit
Fasces

Coder/tech support/asst coordinator

dgun

Test Coordinator

Demosthenes

Admin death killers

Siberian Fox
Cartertonian

These are the only members to whom this forum is open. Please keep all info obtained in here, in here for the time being. Thank you again to everyone for whatever help you can offer.
User avatar
By Drlee
#13785697
What a tremendous amount of work. Very good work.

Social:

External wars are a case of "Rich man's war, poor man's fight."

The reference is to a US civil war saying and the link explains it well. Do we want to use the term “External wars” or would the term “foreign wars” be clearer? Should this question be phrased “all foreign wars can be defined by “rich man’s war, poor man’s fight? Ironic that the term first referred to a civil war.

5. If the state will ask me to lay down my life for it, It is reasonable to ask the state to help me maintain my life in return.
What an insightful question! This will be fun to watch. I suspect there will be some leash chewing over it.

7. Public schools are an example of a failed government program

Is this in the US usage of Public schools? I assume so. Do you want to know if the test taker believes that the government should not be in the school business or if the schools are a failure but still a government responsibility?

8. Since we know in the US that "Public schools" were first begun by corporations seeking to train better employees for their factories, it is reasonable to deduc(e) that they will never function in a much higher capacity now or in the future.

I am not sure this is true. I think Jefferson and others proposed public schools in the US and by the 1840’s they were pretty much universal throughout the states. Prior to that schools (particularly higher education) were religious for the most part. I think it was in England that guilds and companies founded schools to train workers. I may be wrong though.

10. If I grow wheat and my neighbour grows chickens, the easiest solution so that we may both share in each other’s harvests to simply trade items on some mutually agreed upon even keel basis. (or…simply trade by mutual agreement)

14. In an ideal system, there should be more important international forums in which to work. Perhaps, ultimately, an international government?

Could you just say, “Ideally we evolve toward a world government?”

15. The concept of a national border should be emphasized as much as possible

The concept of national borders should be maintained as much as possible


17. Interaction with the rest of the world is more trouble than it is worth. Each nation should strive to handle their own affairs as easily and efficiently as possible.

....Each nation should, first and foremost, act in its own interest.

18. At the height of the cold war, when tensions between the former USSR and the US were at their highest, both societies were at their peaks, as both nations had a plan and a focus.


Wow! You pull no punches. This is an interesting question. I wonder how to score it. Anyway…Are we saying….”at the height of the cold war, when tensions between the USSR and the US were heightened, this tension drove both nations toward greatness?


20. I would be willing to pay a higher rate of taxation (up to 50%) in order to enjoy extra government benefits like free tertiary education, healthcare (if you don’t already get this), extra vacation and sick leave, as well as some kind of modest retirement package.

I think some nations might already approach 50%. We might check it. You might just say, ‘I would be willing to pay higher taxes to enjoy extra government benefits like free tertiary education, healthcare (if you don’t already get this), extra vacation and sick leave, and a modest retirement package.
User avatar
By HoniSoit
#13785845
I share Carter's concern about some of the unnecessarily long and technical questions. These questions are very good, but it sometimes takes quite a while to figure out what the questions are saying exactly. I am wondering whether Demo thinks we should rephrase some of them. If so, I would be happy to help with it.

Not even @wat0n denies that the IDF and Israeli[…]

^ Wouldn't happen though, since the Israelis are n[…]

I was actually unaware :lol: Before he was […]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Every accusation is a confession Why sexual v[…]