FSTDT Forums

Community => Politics and Government => Topic started by: Osama bin Bambi on August 29, 2013, 11:30:22 pm

Title: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Osama bin Bambi on August 29, 2013, 11:30:22 pm
The problems with the Political Compass have been made clear at this point IMO, so I was glad to find an online political test that sucks less: The Political Test. (http://www.politicaltest.net/)

Quote
You are a social-democratic cosmopolitan. 1 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 3 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://i.imgur.com/jKMT8PB.png)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373268_eng.jpg)

(Alternatively, my results can be found at this link. (http://www.politicaltest.net/test/result/373268/))

If I started a Cosmopolitan Party, would we all drink cocktails and be called "the Cosmos" for short? Because that would be kind of cool.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: SpaceProg on August 29, 2013, 11:31:52 pm
Ooooh multiple planes.  I like.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: KZN02 on August 29, 2013, 11:44:12 pm
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 70 percent are more extremist than you.
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373277_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373277_eng.jpg)

To be honest, I felt I was neutral on too many things.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Her3tiK on August 29, 2013, 11:49:39 pm
Quote
You are an anarcho-collectivistic. 0 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 2 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373278_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373278_eng.jpg)
I'm not entirely sure what this means, save that I don't seem to have many gray areas in my beliefs. I think they're saying I believe in working together for mutual benefit, but I've honestly got no idea how they define "anarcho-collectivistic". Or what that even means.

[le web search]

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivist_anarchism): "Collectivist anarchism (also known as anarcho-collectivism) is a revolutionary doctrine that advocates the abolition of both the state and private ownership of the means of production. It instead envisions the means of production being owned collectively and controlled and managed by the producers themselves."

Okay, yeah, I'll buy that. Sounds like what I was saying in my AI government thread.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: LeTipex on August 29, 2013, 11:54:02 pm
You are a Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 36 percent are more extremist than you.
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373281_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373281_eng.jpg)

On the other hand, I find it hillarious that as an engineer in environmental sciences, who choose my career path out of a deep feeling of ecological responsabilities, I still apparently am more anthropocentric than ecological ; according to this test, of course. I guess because I eat meat and agree with medical animal testing? Give me a break. This, and other questions that I felt were a bit vague, leads me to believe that while it's a interesting test, it's far from a complete one.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: dpareja on August 29, 2013, 11:58:15 pm
I took the test, and found it to be very poorly written in places. They offer no description of their methodology, which makes me wonder a bit if they're not just pulling it all out of their ass.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Her3tiK on August 30, 2013, 12:06:05 am
I took the test, and found it to be very poorly written in places. They offer no description of their methodology, which makes me wonder a bit if they're not just pulling it all out of their ass.
I'm more interested in how they define their terms. There is little information at the end of the test that explains the results.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Art Vandelay on August 30, 2013, 12:06:39 am
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373289_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373289_eng.jpg)
Ok, how the fuck is my secular rating so damn low? I not only answered "strongly disagree" for every question on religion, but also weighted all but one of them.

I liked the political compass test a lot better.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Feral Dog on August 30, 2013, 01:08:42 am
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat . 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 33 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373312_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373312_eng.jpg)

Looks like I'm almost a centrist. I didn't weight anything, though.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: PosthumanHeresy on August 30, 2013, 01:26:01 am
You are a Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 8 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373317_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373317_eng.jpg)

I didn't think to weight them, though.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: kefkaownsall on August 30, 2013, 01:29:37 am
I'm surprised you scored anthro Eva
also
Quote
Religious education should be a compulsory subject at all schools.
does this mean like bible study or things like the tenants of islam for dummies cause I mean I think its important to know the tenants ofa  religion and also studying myths etc (http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373321_eng.jpg)
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: guizonde on August 30, 2013, 07:09:03 am
i didn't find this test to be any help, especially since it seems to USA-centric. according to the classical definitions, i'm to the left of extreme left wing, since i'm not on the chart anymore (anarcho-pacifist), but according to the test, i wound up a cosmopolitan social democrat without understanding why, and i'd be on the terrorist charts if i were in the US due to my beliefs that you can do whatever so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else...
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Damen on August 30, 2013, 07:24:53 am
Forum full of capitalistic fascists! I thought we were supposed to be commie pinkos!

Quote
You are a Trotskyist. 3 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 0 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373295_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373295_eng.jpg)

Suck my extremism! :P
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: guizonde on August 30, 2013, 07:30:06 am
Forum full of capitalistic fascists! I thought we were supposed to be commie pinkos!

that's what bugs me. i AM a commie pinko! give me my pinkiness dammit! just because i didn't strongly disagree on everything.... you know what, i don't think the political grid can pinpoint you what you really are with a multiple choice test, perhaps a politoligist, if it matters to you that much...
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: PosthumanHeresy on August 30, 2013, 07:38:57 am
Forum full of capitalistic fascists! I thought we were supposed to be commie pinkos!

that's what bugs me. i AM a commie pinko! give me my pinkiness dammit! just because i didn't strongly disagree on everything.... you know what, i don't think the political grid can pinpoint you what you really are with a multiple choice test, perhaps a politoligist, if it matters to you that much...
What's funny is that I too believe that you should be able to do what you want as long as it's not hurting others, and I'm pretty satisfied with mine. I used strongly agree/disagree for when I think there's no exceptions.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Askold on August 30, 2013, 07:50:23 am
www.politicaltest.net/test/result/373522/

Since when am I a pacifist? Some of the questions seemed a bit weird, but I'm not too suprised from the results.

The only thing that really annoys me that tests like this always put me so far into being secular despite my religious beliefs, I guess not wanting to convert the heathens by the sword takes off a lot of points.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: PosthumanHeresy on August 30, 2013, 07:54:24 am
Actually makes sense, though. It's a secular mindset. Much like someone can be religious and gladly have a secular education, you can be religious with a secular mindset. And, you're more pacifistic if you are less militaristic. I blame my high militaristic-ness on being 75% German, lol.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Flying Mint Bunny! on August 30, 2013, 10:56:22 am
Apparently i'm a cosmopolitan Social Democrat.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373617_eng.jpg)

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373617_eng.jpg)

I think it's weird that it says i'm only 51% secular. I did say that religious education should be compulsory, but teaching children about different religions is not the same as endorsing it...

I think the way some of the questions were worded pushed you towards certain answers as well.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Her3tiK on August 30, 2013, 11:35:06 am
I think it's weird that it says i'm only 51% secular. I did say that religious education should be compulsory, but teaching children about different religions is not the same as endorsing it...

I think the way some of the questions were worded pushed you towards certain answers as well.
Most likely. I answered 'strongly disagree' on that one, even though I agree with you, because of the way that question tends to be interpreted.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: kefkaownsall on August 30, 2013, 01:52:39 pm
I think it's weird that it says i'm only 51% secular. I did say that religious education should be compulsory, but teaching children about different religions is not the same as endorsing it...

I think the way some of the questions were worded pushed you towards certain answers as well.
Most likely. I answered 'strongly disagree' on that one, even though I agree with you, because of the way that question tends to be interpreted.
I hedged my bets and said neutral
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Alehksunos on August 30, 2013, 01:57:48 pm
Quote
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 16 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373713_eng.jpg)

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373713_eng.jpg)

I can't say I'm surprised at all, other than a tiny dose of "Anthropocentrism."

Oh yes, I am another of those folks who voted "Strongly disagree" on compulsory religious education in public schools because I feel like organized religion has no place in public education. And also, the denial of the "Theory" of Evolution (which there is overwhelming evidence of and there is no reason to still believe in Divine Creation).
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Flying Mint Bunny! on August 30, 2013, 02:01:20 pm
I think it's weird that it says i'm only 51% secular. I did say that religious education should be compulsory, but teaching children about different religions is not the same as endorsing it...

I think the way some of the questions were worded pushed you towards certain answers as well.
Most likely. I answered 'strongly disagree' on that one, even though I agree with you, because of the way that question tends to be interpreted.
I hedged my bets and said neutral

I had to do that with the animal testing question because it was worded quite strongly in one direction.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Shane for Wax on August 30, 2013, 02:19:00 pm
You are a Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 36 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373724_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373724_eng.jpg)

Cool. Some of these were worded really weirdly.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: PosthumanHeresy on August 30, 2013, 02:30:46 pm
Re-took it with weighing.

You are a Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 6 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373731_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373731_eng.jpg)
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: SimSim on August 30, 2013, 06:04:05 pm
Blah. Went through that shitty test and got hit with an error. Too many of the questions were vague. Some were over broad liked the meat eating question.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Sigmaleph on August 30, 2013, 07:41:44 pm
Yet another cosmopolitan Social Democrat, 5% are more extremist than me.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373883_eng.jpg)

I would've expected a higher cosmopolitan score, but everything else sounds about right.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: kefkaownsall on August 30, 2013, 08:47:55 pm
Those eco questions should have been more
should slaughter houses be made more humane even if it raises the cost of meat
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Radiation on August 30, 2013, 09:38:15 pm
Apparently I am a cosmopolitan Social Democrat.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: nickiknack on August 31, 2013, 12:10:14 pm
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat . 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 30 percent are more extremist than you.
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/374180_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/374180_eng.jpg)

Yeah, this is about right
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: The Right Honourable Mlle Antéchrist on August 31, 2013, 10:02:54 pm
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 8 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/374439_eng.jpg)

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/374439_eng.jpg)

i didn't find this test to be any help, especially since it seems to USA-centric.

I noticed that as well. I also wish they'd allowed me to weight a few more of the answers.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Valerius on August 31, 2013, 10:43:58 pm
Interesting, but I have to agree with others in that a lot of the questions are poorly worded or too vague, and the complete lack of description regarding their methodology doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in the accuracy of this test. Also agreeing with Mademoiselle Antéchriste; would have been nice to weight more questions.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: mellenORL on September 01, 2013, 01:24:20 pm
Quote
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat . 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 5 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://i.imgur.com/QZYJcdR.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/N4LD49I.png)

Okay, whose sac do I have to gargle to get a Cosmo in this dive?

I took a test with an identical graphic back in '86.....looks like with all that aging, I have turned into my mother, as so many pundits predict. Breaks my inner child's punk anarchist twentysomething's heart  :'(
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: RavynousHunter on September 02, 2013, 09:34:11 am
Quote
You are a Social Democrat. 10 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 5 percent are more extremist than you.
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/375146_eng.jpg)
(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/375146_eng.jpg)

Almost dead-centre...huh.  Guess because I don't believe we shouldn't have to go back to wiping our asses with leaves and eating berries, then I'm some crazed anthropocentrist.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: mellenORL on September 02, 2013, 06:24:08 pm
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Her3tiK on September 02, 2013, 08:07:38 pm
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.
Which, for the record, I am okay with.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: RavynousHunter on September 03, 2013, 10:35:18 am
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.

Its always come across as a very loaded question, for me.  Some seem to ask it meaning what you said, developing new ways of doing old things, and doing them better.  Others seem to be of the anarcho-primitive persuasion and think we should all go back to mud huts and shitting in holes in the ground.

Switching to electric cars and developing better/smarter energy doesn't come across as a drastic change in our lifestyle; its just doing the same things we've been doing for generations, only better.  Its improvement.  Ya know, like we've been doing for centuries.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Flying Mint Bunny! on September 03, 2013, 10:52:21 am
As to the "drastically change our lifestyles to save the Earth" question, I had in mind either giving up our cars for alternative transportation, whether mass transit, all electric vehicles charged via solar/wind/hydrogen fuel cell, riding bikes, renting a car or truck only for special projects. Or, we could actually retrofit all buildings and homes up to LEED's standards, do the smart grid and develop multi source renewable energy sources into it. That's about all the "drastic" we'd need to do, really, besides re-adopting more traditional food animal production methods.

It's a very old, long standing conservative corporate propaganda meme that we'd have to go back to the stone age to make the ecologists and climate scientists happy.

Its always come across as a very loaded question, for me.  Some seem to ask it meaning what you said, developing new ways of doing old things, and doing them better.  Others seem to be of the anarcho-primitive persuasion and think we should all go back to mud huts and shitting in holes in the ground.

Switching to electric cars and developing better/smarter energy doesn't come across as a drastic change in our lifestyle; its just doing the same things we've been doing for generations, only better.  Its improvement.  Ya know, like we've been doing for centuries.

I agree, I don't really see using cleaner energy and recycling as drastic changes. To me a drastic change would be giving up modern technology or having to use those nasty washable sanitary towels  :-\
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: PosthumanHeresy on September 03, 2013, 12:15:30 pm
I don't think it's loaded. Whatever you think it is, all yeses to it are pro-environment. All nos are saying you're not willing to make drastic, whatever you consider as drastic, changes.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: mellenORL on September 03, 2013, 02:39:05 pm
The idea of just giving up having a relatively big fast car is "drastic" to a lot of people here, at least. Our cities and big towns just sprawl out with so much distance between businesses and dwelling areas. I can't afford an electric or hybrid car ATM. With the current next-to-useless one bus per hour per route transit system in Orlando, I would be fucked if I were physically unable to ride a bike.  Even with an electric hub motor added to that bike, I'd have to rethink about where I shop due to distance issues and cargo weight.  Cabs are too expensive, so I'd just have to bike commute in the rain, like all the fucking time. At least that'll rinse off the sweat :P.

This is what the vast majority of Americans now face as an alternative to owning a car. Grim mass transit, oxymoronically named, especially for old and poor folks. Awful-so-no-way-not-ever as far as the better off folks are concerned. So, no tax initiatives pass to truly improve it and make it viable. Private companies don't do mass transit much anymore since the '50's because right-of-way costs and capital risks are too high considering the entrenched negative mindset the public has about how awful our transit system has been, forever. How do you "sell" even the ideal efficient pleasant transit system to an embittered market?

Retrofitting buildings and dwellings to the latest LEED's level energy saving in materials, methods, appliances, etc. is quite expensive, at least until market competition made lower costs occur. So that would be  economically drastic for most people. The utility bill "break even" point would take quite a few years. Retrofitting is often nearly twice as labor intensive (and doubly expensive) as building new to LEEDs stats.

For example, the cost to go off grid, or better; reverse your electric meter (you make more electricity than you use, and it's bought by your electric company - which makes your construction loan payments quite a bit easier) with a full array of solar panels is 35 K and up for the average suburban home. Eventually, a solar panel array will cost less than a major re-roofing job. If you are allowed to do it yourself, which isn't the case everywhere, it's about half that much, less if you shop for bargains or salvage on the non-panel basic stuff (wire, fasteners, etc).

The old roof over my condo?  It's gonna cost 22K for a contractor to replace it with the exact same roof type that is failing now after 35 years. To bring the new roofing up to LEEDs insulation standards - not including solar - would add another 7K for a 6 inch thick sprayed foam sealant/insul layer to the big flat roof sections between mansard shingle roof cupolas, which themselves get special insulation. In my case, the insulation is to prevent heat intrusion into the house and for efficient storm water drainage. Getting a few K back from government rebate programs does not help enough, and most of those will expire before I am able to re-roof. I could actually physically do the basic stripping, roof deck repair, joint sealing of the re-roofing job myself with a couple of local handy men since I have experience and skill in professional remodeling (with thousands of bucks in tools in my garage). That would save me enough to pay the foam roof contractor to finish the job and meet LEEDs. But I am legally forbidden to do anything beyond changing a light fixture or painting a shutter by the rules of my weird, cheap-ass, lawyer driven condo association >:(. Fuck me. If they did allow me to do it myself, I could also find a way to afford to install that net gain solar panel array, adding on in phases over time, with just one electrician to help install, supervise my work, and sign off on it with the building inspector. Double fuck me. >:( >:(

All these many economic and legal impediments to an energy efficient, clean economy are the end result of years of bad legislation from manipulation by old school corporations that make money off the status quo, mostly Big Oil, and by some regional electric company conglomerates via ALEC and the GOP domination of Congress.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Sleepy on September 03, 2013, 02:53:07 pm
I agree that those can be considered drastic changes when you factor in cost, but the statement from the test was worded "We should reduce our living standards massively to protect the environment." I don't see conversion to solar panels, switching to fuel efficient cars, etc. as reducing living standards, but merely as a more "green" way of living. That's why I responded with "I disagree." Asking people to significantly lower their standards just isn't feasible at this point.

For the record, I took the test and received errors, so I didn't get results. And I found it to be way too vague, so I'm not going to bother trying again.
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Alehksunos on September 11, 2013, 01:21:34 am
Quote
You are a cosmopolitan Social Democrat. 14 percent of the test participators are in the same category and 16 percent are more extremist than you.

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic2/373713_eng.jpg)

(http://www.politicaltest.net/test/graphic6/373713_eng.jpg)

I can't say I'm surprised at all, other than a tiny dose of "Anthropocentrism."

Oh yes, I am another of those folks who voted "Strongly disagree" on compulsory religious education in public schools because I feel like organized religion has no place in public education. And also, the denial of the "Theory" of Evolution (which there is overwhelming evidence of and there is no reason to still believe in Divine Creation).

Here is something I just thought about: Once again, this test ranked me as 10% "Anthropocentric", yet I express strong support for environmentalism (I've been this way since 2000, even leading to an obsession about pollution and why it's so important to counteract with such), yet it even claims I'm a wee small bit an Anthropocentrist, because I eat meat, maintain a neutral position on animal testing and doesn't believe in going fuck-all with the industrialization that made us who we are today, just for the sake of the environment. Also both the ideology of anarcho-primativists and a grating meme from anti-enviromentalists, usually social conservatives and Free-market Capitalists, whom have been so corrupted by their greed that they don't think the safety and welfare of the workers, their customers and any communities revolving around their presence matters: To them, it's all about the money. I won't go into any more detail, because mellenORL already gone into as much detail as needed for me.

When taking this test, there were a few broad questions (and I also wondered about the absence of the issue of abortion was), but the outcome is so infuriating in retrospect because I'm being pegged as a small dose of a bastard who just doesn't give a fuck about the environment and other shit. And should I also mention that humans are omnivores, like chimpanzees, one of the very few closest creatures to our intellect and sapience?
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: Ironchew on September 13, 2013, 01:58:36 am
Tried taking the test and it didn't even start before it spewed SQL debug info at me :(
Title: Re: A Political Test that Sucks Less
Post by: The Right Honourable Mlle Antéchrist on September 13, 2013, 02:11:13 am
There's a propriety software/"Ironchew got own'd" pun in here somewhere, but I just can't find it.