As you describe it I’ve no problem. Only why not do it on a personal basis instead of it being an FR thing (at least that’s how I interpret your idea...I may be wrong). Set up your own matrix and see how people fall in place on it. I believe mnehrling had a matrix he posted during the primaries that showed where candidates fell on the political spectrum.
Like you, I tend to stay away from those who’ve outed themselves; Paulettes especially. Not just because of their political stance but because they pontificate and patronize anyone not in lock step with them. THAT’S why I don’t want something like this to become overbearing. I’ve experienced it from the other end from those yokels.
So, go for it. If Jim believes it’s something beneficial for FR, fine. But FR has existed for how many years without such a tool, is it really necessary now? I simply believe in our monitoring our interactions ourselves, calling on the Viking Kitties when necessary to deal with the obvious Troll. It works when needed and also provides an amount of good entertainment; especially when they let us play awhile. That’s something I look forward to...
I believe you are referring to something like the political compass. I'll try to find a new one (mine is below as an example). I do have a little problem though with the concept of a narrow conservative litmus test. Yes, we are a Conservative site, but many people have different value areas that they put out as you either believe in x or you are not Conservative. I've seen statements like "the fair tax is the only litmus test for Conservatives". You can replace fair tax with almost anything and you'll find it here. The problem with that is it doesn't mean that other issues like abortion are not important to that person or they believe differently, it just means that the fair tax is their #1 priority. Unfortunately, others may take that that as an assumption they are a RINO because they are focused on that one issue.
Things like this have caused a decrease in critical thinking. It has gotten bad lately, especially with things like the COLB. If you dare question anything, you are labeled a 'anti-Constitution', Obama supporting traitor (and don't even let me get into the FReepmails..) all for daring question, for example, the credentials of the person who claimed to be an expert saying the COLB was fake. This is just an example, but you can see this type of hostility to critical thinking popping up on a lot of things. Thinking critically doesn't mean you disagree, it means you are trying to get the facts out of the static and not blindly following. Far too many want just a sounding board with no exploration or challenge. It is almost as if they don't believe strongly in their argument so they are afraid of any challenge that may make that argument crumble. The litmus test may be similar, some may want it because they are insecure in their own belief and if someone doesn't share the exact same priority and dot on the chart, they see it as threatening. Not a way to strengthen your own thinking.
(for example, my political compass.)
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 8.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.62
As you describe it I’ve no problem. Only why not do it on a personal basis instead of it being an FR thing (at least that’s how I interpret your idea...I may be wrong).
***It’s too much work for one person, and such a project would need access to the ability to post Excel files on FR.
Set up your own matrix and see how people fall in place on it. I believe mnehrling had a matrix he posted during the primaries that showed where candidates fell on the political spectrum.
***That was Mnehrling’s matrix, his own interpretation, right? This would be the self-selecting matrix that FReeper answers himself. For instance, for Immigration we might have a question like: Amnesty for Illegal aliens.
1= I agree 2= I think we might have to bite the bullet on this 3= I’m in the middle or can’t make up my mind 4= I think we should find other answers, Amnesty will just encourage more illegal aliens in the future. 5= I disagree
If there were 50 questions and each FReeper could allocate 200 points (or whatever, it doesn’t really matter), then we could see that if they dedicate zero points of importance to this issue and they answer 1, that’s about all I would need to know in how to approach them. Zero points, and they’re logging onto a thread? Fishy. 10 points and they answer 1, it could be an interesting discussion.
Like you, I tend to stay away from those who’ve outed themselves; Paulettes especially.
***Then we need a tool where everyone outs themselves. It is the process of hiding that gives RINOs their power.
Not just because of their political stance but because they pontificate and patronize anyone not in lock step with them. THAT’S why I don’t want something like this to become overbearing. I’ve experienced it from the other end from those yokels.
***Once the yokel is outed, it makes the FReeping interaction with them much simpler and straightforward.
So, go for it. If Jim believes it’s something beneficial for FR, fine. But FR has existed for how many years without such a tool, is it really necessary now?
***Yes, it is necessary. Let’s find out if Jim believes it would be beneficial. From his initial response to it, it looks like a no, but look how you have turned around on this issue once you got past the dismissive stage.
I simply believe in our monitoring our interactions ourselves, calling on the Viking Kitties when necessary to deal with the obvious Troll. It works when needed and also provides an amount of good entertainment; especially when they let us play awhile. That’s something I look forward to...
***This isn’t a tool for dealing with trolls. It is a tool for dealing with people who claim to be conservative but when the rubber meets the road, they really aren’t. They’re CINOs coming alongside the leader of the parade, whispering directions to him and then scurrying back into the crowd when the time for straightforward openness is called for.