MovieChat Forums > Politics > Alignment and You: Politics Board Poster...

Alignment and You: Politics Board Posters and Their Alignments, 2nd Edition

posted 21 days ago by SemiAnimus (3251)
72 replies | jump to latest

!!IMPORTANT!!: If you have been aligned as evil please do not take offense. It is not a condemnation but a reflection of the intent of how your communications are directed to and impact others, both the theoretical objects of your views and discussions, and who you interact with directly here. From my own perspective, "evil" posters are often more preferable than their "good" counterparts. Please don't take offense at that either, good people. Also note that there are good and evil and both the "left" and "right" political spectrums and alignment is not a matter of political affiliation.

Before I get into this too much, the first few posts are an explanation but feel free to skip ahead if it's too much to read, you already understand these concepts, or both.

This is something I've considered doing for awhile but until now the investment of time has stopped me. That's not the case this evening, so I'd like to share this with all of you here.

In a former hobby of mine, there's something called alignment that refers to someone's predispositions towards acting a certain way. This trait is broken down into two parts, a dichotomy of law and chaos, and one of good and evil, with neutral being somewhere between the two in both areas. These are the concepts at hand:

Law and Chaos
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should. Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior believe that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has a normal respect for authority and feels neither a strong compulsion to follow rules nor a compulsion to rebel. They are generally honest but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others if it suits them.

Good and Evil
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good people make personal sacrifices to help others. Evil implies harming, oppressing, and dehumanizing others. Some evil individuals simply have no compassion for others and harm them without qualms if doing so is convenient or beneficial to their purposes. Some actively pursue evil, hurting others for sport or out of a perceived duty to some higher authority or power. People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have reservations against harming the innocent but generally lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.

These two elements are combined together into a person’s alignment, so that someone may be labeled any combination of the two, such as lawful good and chaotic evil, with the only exception being the equivalent of neutral neutral is labeled as true neutral instead. In a way this is a reversible spectrum, ranging from law and chaos on one end, and good and evil on the other.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

Below are explanations for how these specific alignments translate into behavioral characteristics:

Lawful Good
Lawful good individuals, also known as “crusaders,” believe in order and doing good. They are typically honest, fair, and are always striving to do what is right and helps others. They believe in following laws and rules, as long as rules do not conflict with their moral code, that to them is the highest law.

Neutral Good
Neutral good individuals, also known as “benefactors,” do what is necessary to bring about the greatest good. Though rules are generally followed, they are not bound by the constraints of rules and may act outside of the law if they believe it is necessary to do what is right.

Chaotic Good
Chaotic good individuals, also known as “rebels,” believe in helping others and are dedicated to causes, but they also value their own freedom and independence with little to no regard for what is typically considered acceptable standards of behavior. They frequently act outside of the rules to achieve their well-intentioned goals and often appear unpredictable in their actions.

Lawful Neutral
Lawful neutral individuals, also known as “judges,” believe in the conformity of following rules for the sake of order and stability as what is important above all else. Though not necessarily opposed to personal freedoms, such concerns are outweighed by the need to maintain structure. Emotional concerns of helping or hurting others are distantly important compared to the values of order and consistency.

True Neutral
True neutral individuals, also known as “uncommited,” are neutral on both axes and do not lean strongly towards any particular alignment. They may act in their own self-interest, but they do not necessarily prioritize their own desires over either the greater good or at the expense of others' well being.

Chaotic Neutral
Chaotic neutral individuals, also known as “anarchists,” value their own freedom and independence above all else. Generally perceived as the most unpredictable, those with this alignment are less prone to maintaining rigidly consistent belief structures, at least from the perspective of outsiders, that may place limits on their personal freedoms. They are not overly concerned with either helping or hurting others but neither are they indifferent.

Lawful Evil
Lawful evil individuals, also known as “dominators,” believe in order and control at any cost, and they are willing to use whatever means necessary to achieve it, without regard for how their actions may compromise the well being of others. Those who suffer are deserving because it is a result of their own errors, weakness or both.

Neutral Evil
Neutral evil individuals, also known as “malefactors,” are motivated by their own self-interest above all else and are willing to do whatever is necessary to achieve their goals, even if it means acting in a way that hurts others. Harming others is not necessarily their objective, but there are no reservations if it occurs collaterally.

Chaotic Evil
Chaotic evil individuals, also known as “destroyers,” are motivated by their own desires and are willing to do whatever is necessary to achieve them. Not only is the suffering of others acceptable in these pursuits, but it is maximized whenever possible. They value their own interests above all else and take pleasure in destroying the foundations of the beliefs of others and the resulting anguish this causes, that often becomes an objective in itself.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

Lawful good characters, also known as “crusaders,” believe in order and doing good. They are typically honest, fair, and always striving to do what is right. They believe in following laws and rules, as long as they do not con
Lawful neutral

I think you left a part out. You have an unfinished sentence.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

Corrected. Thank you.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

I think you left out chaotic good based on the pattern in the thread.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Corrected. Thank you.

[–] StoneKeeper (28301) 20 days ago

Well this is all quite interesting to say the least. I would lie if I said I read/understood 100% but get the gist of it and shall come back at a later time to read more into it. Maybe… 😀

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Thanks Stoney. It's awesome seeing you post here.

I appreciate you taking the time to look at this and as now as a bona fide politics board poster, you have been added to the list well.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

One last thing that is my personal take on alignment. I describe it not only in these terms, but also how someone acts that is oriented towards a shift towards a neighboring alignment. Here's what I'm referring to:

Lawful---Neutral---Chaotic

Evil---Neutral---Good

The idea is that someone acts primarily towards a certain alignment, say lawful neutral, but they also tend towards a shift in one degree in another direction in one spectrum or both, such as neutral good.

So lawful neutral shifting in the direction of neutral good would be listed as:

lawful neutral -> neutral good

Note that lawful neutral - > lawful evil, lawful good, neutral evil and true neutral are also potential shifts from the same starting point.

An extension of this idea is that those with a shift on both axes rather than one tend to display more variation, or in other words less consistency, in their alignment.

If you've read all of this in succession, great. The fun part is next.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

A list of the posters on the politics board and their alignment:

kspksp: Lawful Neutral -> Lawful Good

Guitar King: Chaotic Good -> Chaotic Neutral

B1cKsurN: Lawful Evil -> Lawful Neutral

AmeriGirl26: Lawful Neutral -> Neutral Good

Gd5150: Chaotic Neutral -> True Neutral

Bubbathegut: Lawful Good -> Lawful Neutral

MexicanStandup: Lawful Neutral -> Lawful Evil

Porsche911: Chaotic Neutral -> Neutral Evil

Keelai: Chaotic Neutral -> Neutral Good

tvfan: Lawful Neutral -> Lawful Evil

filmflaneur: True Neutral -> Neutral Evil

JoWilli: True Neutral -> Neutral Evil

chilidoggg: Neutral Good -> Chaotic Good

curiousMInd101: Lawful Evil -> Neutral Good*

ClownBaby: Neutral Evil -> Chaotic Evil

Rorikon: Neutral Good -> Chaotic Good

Melton: True Neutral -> Lawful Evil

SemiAnimus: True Neutral -> Chaotic Neutral

aliensalmon: Neutral Good -> Lawful Good

beancrisp: True Neutral -> Lawful Neutral

MarkPh: Chaotic Neutral -> True Neutral

BlackMass: Chaotic Evil -> Neutral Evil

paul25: Chaotic Neutral -> Chaotic Evil

FootOfDavros: Neutral Evil -> Chaotic Neutral

Thaistickers: Chaotic Evil -> Chaotic Neutral

jriley555: Neutral Good -> True Neutral

OnanTheBarbarian: Chaotic Good -> Neutral Good

BKB: Lawful Neutral -> Lawful Good

Zarkoff: True Neutral -> Chaotic Good

chilidoggg: Neutral Good -> Chaotic Good

CraigC: Lawful Neutral -> Neutral Evil

Satan2016: True Neutral -> Lawful Good

Skavau (retired): True Neutral -> Neutral Good

TheHardSell: Chaotic Evil -> True Neutral

Bloodshot77: Chaotic Neutral -> Chaotic Good

TrentnQuarantino: Neutral Evil -> True Neutral

StoneKeeper: Neutral Good -> Lawful Good

Let me know if you're not on this list and would like to be aligned. If you already are, do you agree or disagree with your alignment? How would you describe yourself?

Note that this isn’t something to interpret as an absolute and it’s more of a generalization than anything else. I hope that you have at least found it interesting.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

Why does mine have an asterisk next to my name?

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

In regards to the *, you're a bit of an exception to the one degree shift rule that I had mentioned. Aligning a National Socialist with a heart of gold is no simple task.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

"A National Socialist with a heart of gold."
This will be on my tombstone. Thank you.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

You're welcome. That picture worthy epithet would almost certainly make rounds on the internet.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

https://i.imgur.com/lII8Kc6.png

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

LOL

Oh man that's great. The heart is perfect.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

I wish Skavau were here. I’d be curious to hear his thoughts — both on his alignment and mine. I bet he’d have a lot to say.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

Same here.

Skavau was hard to describe in these terms. After conversations between us and the posts here, I came to the overall conclusion that Skavau doesn't have many answers and considers what "is" by what "is not," which is why I think the threads had so much conflict from the constant rejection of the ideas presented by others, but has overall good intentions. Sort of like a more predictable version of Keelai (no offense to you Keelai), if that makes sense.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

That makes perfect sense. He did have some core beliefs, like his standard old-school liberal values, which were very important to him, and he got upset when anyone tried to undermine them. But beyond that, he seemed to have an affinity for contemporary progressive politics. However, as you said, he was more defined by what he’s not, rather than what he is.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

Yeah, I imagine it was hard pinning me down, as I like to keep people guessing. But you’ve known me long enough, and I think you’ve hit the bullseye. I could be channeling Hitler one moment and, literally, in the next sentence, I could be Mother Teresa, advocating for the poor and the downtrodden. Despite how it may appear, I do have a coherent worldview, and I try to give people bits and pieces here and there so they can piece it together for themselves. My goal here has always been to break people out of their paradigms and get them to see things from new perspectives, different vantage points, fresh frames of reference, and various lenses. To provoke, to think, to argue, to explore taboo topics, and introduce a little chaos and controversy. I wanted to take on unpopular opinions, defend them as if they were my own, and, in doing so, some of them actually became my own, to some extent. I hope it was as fun and interesting to everyone as it was to me.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

Those are pretty much my thoughts as well.

I hope it was as fun and interesting to everyone as it was to me.

Was? I hope that was an intended is and you're not thinking of leaving for good.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

No, I'm not planning on leaving. I might not be around for the next couple of days, but I'll definitely drop in sometime next week. And of course, I'll be here tonight.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

Awesome; not that you're leaving, but that you'll be returning. I was worried for a moment.

Meanwhile, I wonder how many of our companions here will be able to make it through this wall of text.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

I'm not sure. The good news is that most of the people here are older, and therefore not as riddled with ADHD, which is a plus. On the other hand, they too have been immersed in the same digital hallucination, which is gradually making them more illiterate and shortening their attention spans.

[–] Melton (5554) 20 days ago

I think I’ve heard of this system before, it’s quite interesting.

I don’t agree with your initial assessment of me, but I can understand why you might have arrived at it.

I’m motivated by a desire to create a positive world that maximises wellbeing and minimises suffering, with values like honesty, integrity, pragmatism, prosperity, liberty and decency at its core.

Part of achieving that means calling out evil, and there’s plenty of evil lurking around Moviechat. Authoritarian wokists who brainwash their children into mutilating themselves like Flimflam, slimy gaslighters like Skavau, or narcissistic Leftoid perverts like Kowalski are evil creatures and deserve criticism, ridicule and punishment.

You’ll find that I’m very friendly towards decent people, forgiving of those who truly repent, and complimentary towards all things good - especially films. I come here ultimately because I love movies 🤷🏻‍♂️

I don’t know where that puts me on your system but hopefully sheds some light on my motivations.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Awesome response, Melton.

You make compelling points and thinking about what you've said along with our interactions in various contexts, I agree with your premises here.

I believe your intentions are honorable, even if your methods can cause anguish to others as you act to put them into effect. You desire order, even if chaos is required as an intermediary to achieve it. You're a tough one to classify, my friend.

Your alignment has changed to True Neutral -> Lawful Neutral.

[–] Melton (5554) 20 days ago

Thanks SemiAnimus, I appreciate your willingness to understand.

For me, the key first step to building the positive world I outlined is honesty, telling the simple truth, and that’s what triggers Leftists - because their whole ideology is built on lies. Lies that it pleasures them to tell themselves and each other.

The reason that Leftists/Wokists/Progressives are always Evil (both in my usage of that word and in this model) is that they are ultimately self-centred. The casual Leftist’s primary goal is to gain the approval of the cult, hence virtue signalling - a shallow and deceitful activity designed to farm peer approval, no matter how much damage they cause. Flimflam brainwashed his child to mutilate her body - an evil act - because it got him likes.

The hard-core Leftist’s primary goal is the raw quest for power over other people. These are the scum that create and perpetuate Communist countries. What happens to Communist countries? They collapse, killing and emiserating millions of people. Why? Because the Leftist is not a pragmatist, they deny reality in favour of their pleasurable lies, and the leaders are corrupt tyrants - all of them self-centred, evil.

Why do Blue states in America turn to shit? Same reason - the policies don’t work, but nobody cares because they’re too busy telling themselves that they’re good and moral and right, while their societies crumble. They flee to Red states which are safe and prosperous… but continue to vote Blue to virtue signal, ruining whole new areas like a virus.

Leftists try to portray themselves as compassionate, they’re anything but. I urge everyone to look past what they say and instead look at the worlds they create - ‘by their fruits you shall know them’.

Skavau was Lawful Evil because he was a power-mad deceiver.

Flimflam is probably Neutral Evil - totally self-centred and immoral but not necessarily as thirsty for raw power as Skavau.

Kowalski is Chaotic Evil - a pure narcissist who takes pleasure in destroying this site by spewing his me-me-me drivel over the movie boards, sabotaging discussions and derailing threads. He’s also depraved - describing graphic gay sex acts in front of his kid daughter on here 🤢

Notice how all these fuckers are fans of censorship. I haven’t tried to censor anyone, but these self-deluding cowards cannot tolerate the truth so they impulsively reach for the duct tape and the ban-hammer. Anyone who has done that on this site or any other is Evil.

The reason I despise these creatures is because I want a positive world for everyone, and their self-serving ego-pleasuring deceit is what is holding us back from that, and therefore I excoriate them. Notice, though, that in most cases I’m simply telling the truth - like with those threads that exposed Skavau’s tactics - I’m simply holding up a mirror, and the truth is deeply painful to evil people in denial.

So what can appear as aggression is actually the medicine that burns. What look like insults are actually the hard truths needed to embark on a journey to self-awareness, which is the first step to healing. When you exorcise a demon, the subject will kick and scream and spew bile, but it’s all ultimately for their good. The truth will eventually set them free.

Honestly reading down the list the only one I really connect with is Lawful Good, with occasional dips into Chaotic Good if I’m feeling silly. I appreciate that it may not immediately appear that way with the sheer amount of evil we have to deal with on Moviechat. At least we can do that here, on Reddit you just get banned the moment you deviate from Leftist orthodoxy, that is an evil site.

Anyway, it’s a cool model and has sparked some interesting discussion 🍻

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Melton that was an incredibly thoughtful post and I could go on for pages about that. For now though I've thought of something that might give an example of where these assessments are coming from.

Imagine if you will, that something someone said made Skavau cry. Here's how the different alignments might respond to that situation:

Lawful Good: The lawful good person feels genuine sympathy for Skavau, even though they believe that Skavau deserved it. They tell Skavau as much, repeating that Skavau was wrong but offering their condolences over the hurt feelings.

Neutral Good: The neutral good person feels sorry for Skavau and, even though it might have been Skavau's fault, wishes that there was a way to communicate it without having made Skavau cry. They let Skavau know that they didn't intend to make anyone cry and are sorry.

Chaotic Good: Skavau probably had it coming, but the chaotic good person feels bad for making Skavau cry, even though they don't immediately tell Skavau. A day later, this person responds to Skavau with a self depreciating post that indirectly indicates their desire to be friendly.

Lawful Neutral: The lawful neutral person barely acknowledges that they made Skavau cry. They point out that Skavau was simply wrong and reiterate the same point again.

True Neutral: The true neutral person experiences a mix of both concern and indifference about making Skavau cry and quickly moves on. They may avoid repeating the same thing again to Skavau in the future to avoid hurt feelings, but that will depend on how Skavau treats them.

Chaotic Neutral: This person is mildly concerned about making Skavau cry and didn't intend to, but doesn't waste much energy regretting it either. This conversation might as well have never happened because it will not affect future exchanges with Skavau.

Lawful Evil: The lawful evil person laughs at Skavau and goes on to explain how Skavau's views are wrong and stupid, and anyone that holds them deserves to suffer for their flawed thinking.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Neutral Evil: Knowing that they made Skavau cry brings a slight sneer to this person's face. They make a sarcastic remark to Skavau, but most significantly they note Skavau's weakness and plan to exploit it in future conversations to make themselves appear right or to further their own reputation without caring that it will be at Skavau's expense.

Chaotic Evil: The chaotic evil person cares little about what the conversation was even about and goes on a trollish rant, calling Skavau all sorts of names and attempting to make Skavau cry again. This person stalks Skavau's posts for some time, attempting to make Skavau suffer more for the fun of it, not because they care about any ideas or causes.

[–] Melton (5554) 19 days ago

Wow, this is an interesting dimension.

OK, so if I were to make Skavau cry by telling him hard truths it would be akin to a father seeing his young son stamping on a box of puppies, grabbing him by the arm and sternly telling him off.

I don’t want him to cry, but he must learn that you can’t do that, it’s evil, Skavau might enjoy it but it’s cruel and in the long term it will not just harm scores of puppies, it will also harm himself. The sickness that drove him to stamp on puppies must be cured, even if the medicine burns and makes him cry.

Now, what does Skavau do after he dries his tears? This is crucial. If he shows remorse, repents for what he did and genuinely resolves to change his ways, then I have every sympathy and will give him a big hug and show him the path to treating puppies and people with kindness.

If, however, he cries until dad stops telling him off, slinks away, and is later found stomping on another box of puppies, you can bet there will be hell to pay, and no amount of tears will stop the corrective punishments he will receive, for mercy on the evil is cruelty to the innocent.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 18 days ago

The idea that you were scolding Skavau because he was stepping on puppies and then he cried because of your harsh words and you were then the evil person, not him, in the situation is honestly so funny it's hard to give you a focused answer now. I'm sorry, I ran out of characters in that post and had intended to go back and note that Skavau crying was over a conversation about something relatively benign, like Belaurus banning anyone with a passport stamped from an LGBT friendly country being denied entry, not something extreme like stomping baby beagles that might have complicated the concepts.

[–] Melton (5554) 18 days ago

🤣

Perhaps the analogies are getting rather stretched.

To be honest I think if most people saw Skavau burst into tears over some stranger being denied entry to Belarus because their passport had an LGBT stamp… they would assume he was mentally ill.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 17 days ago

What about after Skavau revealed that his entire LGBT family was on a plane to Belarus when they were denied entry, only for the departing plane they were forced to take to burst into flame on the runway, killing everyone on board?

[–] Melton (5554) 17 days ago

Is he stomping on a box of puppies while he’s sobbing?

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 20 days ago

I really like what you said here, Melton. It seems we share the same values and goals. I understand the need to punish, as I feel that urge myself when it comes to the Wokes. But I do try to balance it with compassion and understanding. I don’t often succeed, but I do try.

When it comes to wokeness, I think the tide is finally turning in our favor. I can feel us moving closer to the world we want to see. Of course, I want to go further, much further, towards a society where people can truly flourish — where they are prosperous economically, morally, and spiritually.

I believe we’re taking our first steps toward some of those areas.

[–] Melton (5554) 20 days ago

Thanks Curious, likewise, and yes we’re definitely moving out of the grip of Wokism, Trump has already proved himself to be a blessing for America and the wider world. You can feel the clouds of misery finally parting.

Your discussions on here are always hugely entertaining. The way you handle evil Leftists is great fun. You have some spicy takes around race realism and it blows the minds of creatures like Skavau.

He would explode in a rage, gobsmacked at your controversial opinions, but you would just calmly lay them out with a warm smile, page after page. It drove him completely insane 🤣

[–] Satan2016 (26186) 20 days ago

Can I be Chaotic Evil -> Super Evil?

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

No, but you do bring up an interesting point and something that hasn't come up yet.

Some rare individuals do act in such a manner that is so consistently in one direction to where describing a shift towards another would be inappropriate. This is particularly true in the case of extremes, such as lawful good or chaotic evil, as you brought up. You don't encounter these individuals often, if ever. They are the likes of serial killers on one end and saints on the other.

I will add your alignment shortly though.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Reading through your posts, you indeed have an usual alignment and the first of its kind so far.

Added and I hope you aren't disappointed.

[–] filmflaneur (3026) 20 days ago

I'm flattered..

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

That wasn't my intent, but I'm glad that you are.

That you are one of the "good" posters here is self evident. While your purpose here is an exchange of ideas, and you take no issue pointing out the flaws in the thinking of others, you do so in a way that is not spiteful or overtly intended to hurt them. On the contrary, your intent appears to be to help others find a better way through such corrections.

In regards to order, my impression is that you primarily tend to gravitate towards concepts that result in societal harmony and mutual equivalency, but you are not strictly bound by these conventions and your overall objective is often the well being of others.

You've had to defend yourself often here, but I'm glad that you've joined the rest of us on the forums. As you said to me awhile ago, though you weren't referencing yourself directly, those with a nature such as yours are rare in an environment like this. I hope you stay long.

[–] B1cKsurN (17821) 20 days ago

I'm honored I'm first on the list, but IRL I'm nothing like I am here.

I'm 100% Chaotic Good in the physical world.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

That could make perfect sense.

I could see someone with that disposition using this site, where there is less at stake than in the "real world" as a means to rebel against their own beliefs or practices in life, either out of boredom, constrained resentment or both, in such a way that their presence here approximates the inverse of how they are the real world.

By the way, I've been adding posters to the list on the top and bottom, but I'm running out of names so, if not at the top, you'll stay near it. Thanks for your reply.

[–] B1cKsurN (17821) 19 days ago

I just like to shitpost.

All the internet has done, is expose that the majority of humans have a stick up their asses about anything and everything.

"Real World Stake" makes me laugh, because the only people IRL that care enough about a rando's online text enough to try and ruin their livelihoods...are huge narcissists with nothing going on in theirs.

if not at the top, you'll stay near it

😁

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 17 days ago

It’s not a list without Bubbathegut. He’s got the biggest, most informative, political thread under Trump, and 18,000 posts.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 17 days ago

Or apparently without you for that matter.

You two will be my next additions. Thanks for pointing that out.

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 17 days ago

Meh I’m easy. I just call everyone senile and lemmings until I put them on ignore. lol!

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 13 days ago

You both have been added. You were actually the more difficult of the two.

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 11 days ago

Ah thanks for tanking the time! It’s an interesting observation.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 11 days ago

You're welcome. I've got a nice list going so far.

[–] Bubbathegut (18241) 12 days ago

Thanks for the shout out. I appreciate it. I dont have much time lately to post lately. I have been working 45 to 50 hours a week on night shift. blech. lol

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 11 days ago

It’s ok Trump and Elon are fixing it.

[–] Rorikon (18380) 16 days ago

I actually agree with your assessment of me. Chaos is thy name, Entropy is the game. I'm surprised there is not more Evil on the list based on the stuff said or the 'hate' if not lack of 'empathy' one spews.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 16 days ago

That's cool you agree with my assessment.

I was looking at intent over a range of posts; sort of like reading in between the lines in a way. Keelai comes up a lot here for example, and regularly says provocative things. At the same time, Keelai's objective isn't to communicate hate and to create tension, like say black mass. At the same time, Keelai isn't going to avoid responding to shit posts as you might. For that and other reasons, Keelai is generally neutral compared to you being good.

As an aside it surprises me how much shit you take from the right posters here without lashing out and getting into back and forths. Maybe you've learned better over your 18000 posts, but for someone who seems like a moderate with a left bent, your patience and avoidance of conflict stand out.

[–] JoWilli (21595) 15 days ago

its just an honor to be recognized on a website. luckily for me, my online persona is the opposite of my real persona.

[–] Gd5150 (11961) 11 days ago

Ha that’s kinda how I feel. Online is for venting so I don’t vent on people I actually care about lol!

And for laughs.

[–] aliensalmon (5855) 21 days ago

Thanks for the alignment assessment.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

I believe yours is quite accurate. You certainly have a way of bringing out the best in people.

[–] aliensalmon (5855) 21 days ago

Thanks to you too. We have our disagreements, but yeah.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

By the way, what did you think of the song I posted on your 'Best Slow Dance Song' thread? I thought something classic from the '80s would be just the right touch.

[–] aliensalmon (5855) 21 days ago

That wasn't my topic, that was tcrum's I think. Still, I'll see what that's about.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4565) 21 days ago

Oh, I'm sorry. My mistake — for some reason, I thought it was your thread.

[–] Bloodshot77 (14231) 20 days ago

I remember fourlemons as being the author of that.

Signed, million man.

[–] aliensalmon (5855) 20 days ago

Yes, she was the author.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 21 days ago

You're welcome! Completely irrespective of political orientation, you are clearly one of the good guys here.

[–] aliensalmon (5855) 21 days ago

Heh....thanks! I agree that we have disagreements (same as with curiousMind), but yeah.

[–] jriley555 (8541) 20 days ago

Its nice to not be considered an asshole. I appreciate it. Wondering how in da world you were able to make these fairly fine-grained assessments ?? Speaking for most, its nice to be noticed, when you're not, ah, KOWALSKY or SamoanJoe or another of these gd attention hogs around here ;)

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

Thanks for checking this out.

I have a background in philosophy and ethics and I find myself making observations about people, their motivations, and the level of concern that they place on the impacts that their words here may have on others.

I do want to point out that none of this is pejorative, particularly the "evil" designations. None of these alignments are assessments that someone is "bad" per say, but it is more an examination of their philosophical outlooks regarding their beliefs and by extension their actions. Evil would more accurately be described in the sense of "do as thou can and wilt" rather than a cartoon villain like Dr. Evil who is bent on destroying the world. Conversely, good in the sense that I've used it here could be described to have negatives as well. Even so, this is more of a game to me and I won't pretend to claim that this is as decisively relevant as the person who posted the political test on here this week assured us it was.

And I'm glad to both catch your attention as well as give it. Thanks again for your response here.

[–] Keelai (36124) 20 days ago

People are wired differently. For instance, creative people like artists and writers need a great deal of freedom whereas military/police prefer a more confined rule-based order. Society needs both to function.

I generally agree with my assessment, and I believe in a live and let live world.

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 20 days ago

I think you are generally one of the most misunderstood posters here but I'm glad that that I captured your alignment close enough for you to agree with my assessment.

You are a keystone of these boards, and your detractors here would miss you far more than they realize. Thanks for your response, Keelai.

[–] Keelai (36124) 20 days ago

You're welcome. Thanks for the compliment and your hard work at assessing so many MCers.

[–] B1cKsurN (17821) 20 days ago

I think you are generally one of the most misunderstood posters here

A Nazi with a heart of shit? 💩

[–] SemiAnimus (3251) 19 days ago

Between your nearly opposite views as well as nearly polar opposite alignments, it's no surprise that the two of you don't get along.