AI Personality Assessments

[Husker_Du]

24 minutes ago, Saylors_Tiny_Willie said:

jross is a sad dick sucker.

excellent addition to the conversation.

keep it up and you'll be booted. 

now tell me you don't care.

i don't care either. stop wasting my time being juvenile and post something of substance. 

[Saylors_Tiny_Willie]

26 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

excellent addition to the conversation.

keep it up and you'll be booted. 

now tell me you don't care.

i don't care either. stop wasting my time being juvenile and post something of substance. 

Let's discuss it in person at the next US Open.

[El Luchador]

27 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

excellent addition to the conversation.

keep it up and you'll be booted. 

now tell me you don't care.

i don't care either. stop wasting my time being juvenile and post something of substance. 

The best thing that can happen is to let them tell us who they are. 

 

[El Luchador]

BTW Willy are you going to be at Fargo this year?

[JimmySpeaks]

8 minutes ago, El Luchador said:

BTW Willy are you going to be at Fargo this year?

Yes 

[JimmySpeaks]

12 minutes ago, Saylors_Tiny_Willie said:

Let's discuss it in person at the next US Open.

I’d love to. 

[WrestlingRasta]

12 hours ago, El Luchador said:

BTW Willy are you going to be at Fargo this year?

 

12 hours ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Yes 

Sign in to the wrong account?

It all makes sense now...

[JimmySpeaks]

31 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

 

Sign in to the wrong account?

It all makes sense now...

If that was the case youd get a time out for feelings. 

[Caveira]

35 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

 

Sign in to the wrong account?

It all makes sense now...

How many burner accounts do we have?

[headshuck]

I suspect Vak has a few.

[WrestlingRasta]

56 minutes ago, Caveira said:

How many burner accounts do we have?

Where did I mention you??   Comprehension...

[JimmySpeaks]

1 hour ago, Caveira said:

How many burner accounts do we have?

Seems like a lot.  That fish dude was claiming it and now this. 

[JimmySpeaks]

45 minutes ago, headshuck said:

I suspect Vak has a few.

He hasn’t been on here as Vak since his picture showed up.  I don’t blame him though. 

[jross]

Lisa Morales  is a highly negative, provocative troll with low agreeableness and emotional intelligence, driven by a desire to disrupt and elicit reactions. Their comments reflect emotional reasoning, black-and-white thinking, and a callous, conflict-loving streak consistent with psychopathic tendencies. They exhibit low conscientiousness and openness, moderate extraversion, and a high risk tolerance, thriving on controversy. Their tone is sarcastic and hostile, with short posts and no emoji use. They fit the "loserthink" and "midwit" archetypes due to unproductive, emotionally driven arguments and average intellectual depth. Culturally, they appear U.S.-based with an anti-conservative, secular slant. Their attachment style is avoidant, and they respond to stress by lashing out. Morally, they prioritize personal amusement over fairness or empathy.

 

Analysis

 

1. Are they a troll? (Provocative, insincere, disruptive?)

Yes, the user exhibits strong trolling behavior. Their comments are consistently provocative, often using inflammatory, derogatory, or mocking language (e.g., "Fat Donald," "libtard," "gross trumpy"). They target political figures, athletes, and other forum users with personal insults, crude humor, and exaggerated claims (e.g., "Justin Trudeau is banging his wife"). The intent appears to be to provoke reactions rather than engage in sincere discussion, as seen in their repetitive use of controversial topics (politics, religion, personal attacks) across unrelated threads. Posts like "I'm close to being kicked off so I better not comment" (2025-05-11) suggest self-awareness of their disruptive behavior.

 

2. Estimated IQ? (Rough guess based on reasoning, vocabulary, nuance?)

The user’s comments show basic coherence but lack sophistication in reasoning or vocabulary. Their arguments are simplistic, often relying on insults (e.g., "gobsmacking moron," "functional illiterate") rather than structured reasoning or evidence. The vocabulary is colloquial and repetitive, with frequent use of slang ("libtard," "trumpy") and crude expressions. The absence of nuanced or complex ideas suggests an average to slightly below-average IQ, roughly estimated in the 90–100 range. However, this is a crude estimate, as IQ cannot be precisely gauged from forum posts alone.

 

3. Do they fit the Dark Triad?

• Narcissism (bragging, attention-seeking): Moderate. The user doesn’t overtly brag about themselves but seeks attention through provocative statements (e.g., "It would be an honor to be banned" [2025-05-11]). Their focus on controversial topics and inflammatory remarks suggests a desire to stand out and elicit reactions.
• Machiavellianism (manipulative, strategic): Low to moderate. There’s some strategic provocation (e.g., targeting sensitive topics like politics or religion to stir debate), but the approach lacks subtlety or long-term manipulation. The user’s tactics are blunt rather than calculated.
• Psychopathy (callous, conflict-loving): High. The user displays callousness through harsh insults (e.g., "Fat man destroyed the U.S." [2025-04-21], "PSU bible wackos" [2025-05-12]) and a clear enjoyment of conflict, as seen in their consistent mockery of individuals and groups (e.g., MAGA supporters, wrestlers, political figures). Their tone suggests little empathy for those they criticize.

Overall, the user aligns most closely with psychopathy, with some narcissistic tendencies but limited Machiavellian traits.

 

4. Are they positive or negative? (Uplifting vs. critical tone?)

Strongly negative. The vast majority of comments are critical, sarcastic, or outright hostile. They mock individuals (e.g., "Trump weighs 224 lbs" [2025-04-16]), belittle groups (e.g., "Dumbass MAGA people everywhere" [2025-03-31]), and rarely offer constructive or uplifting remarks. Even seemingly neutral comments (e.g., about wrestling predictions) are laced with sarcasm or cynicism.

 

5. Do they reason based on data or emotion?

Primarily emotion-driven. The user’s comments rely heavily on feelings of disdain, anger, or amusement rather than factual arguments. For example, claims like "The fat man is the laughing stock of the world" (2025-04-04) or "Trump will never die. Cockroaches live forever" (2025-05-21) are emotionally charged and lack supporting evidence. When they mention specifics (e.g., "Dow down another 1,000 points" [2025-04-21]), they provide no context or verification, suggesting hyperbole over data-driven reasoning.

 

6. Big Five Personality Traits

• Openness: Low. The user shows little creativity or curiosity, sticking to repetitive insults and provocative themes (politics, personal attacks). Their comments lack exploration of new ideas or perspectives, favoring conventional trolling tactics.
• Conscientiousness: Low. The posts are often sloppy, with grammatical errors (e.g., "Way too early in the season for horrible grammer" [2025-06-07]) and a rushed, careless style. They don’t engage deeply with topics, suggesting a lack of effort or organization.
• Extraversion: Moderate to high. The user is highly engaged and energetic in their posts, frequently commenting across threads to provoke reactions. However, this is more performative than social, as they don’t build connections.
• Agreeableness: Very low. The user is harsh, argumentative, and uncooperative, consistently attacking others (e.g., "Poor people and try to pretend they don’t exist" [2025-05-01]). They show little kindness or empathy.
• Neuroticism: Moderate. The user’s tone suggests emotional reactivity (e.g., anger toward political figures or groups), but they maintain a consistent trolling persona, indicating some emotional stability in their approach. Their provocations don’t seem driven by anxiety but by a desire to disrupt.

7. Myers-Briggs Personality Type

Based on the traits observed, the user likely aligns with ENTP (Extraverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Perceiving). They are outspoken and energetic (extraverted), focus on provocative ideas (intuitive), prioritize logic over feelings in their critiques (thinking, albeit emotionally charged), and show flexibility in jumping between topics without rigid structure (perceiving). However, their thinking is less analytical and more confrontational, which slightly skews the fit.

 

8. Emotional Intelligence (Aware of others’ emotions, adaptable?)

Low. The user shows little awareness of or concern for others’ emotions, frequently using callous or offensive remarks (e.g., "Very hurtful comment" [2025-05-19], used sarcastically). Their adaptability is limited to shifting between insults and sarcasm, with no effort to tailor their tone to the audience or context. They seem indifferent to the emotional impact of their words.

 

9. Leadership Tendencies (Decisive, guiding, inspiring?)

None. The user doesn’t exhibit decisiveness, guidance, or inspiration. Their comments are divisive and aim to provoke rather than lead. They show no interest in rallying others toward a goal or providing constructive direction.

 

10. Motivated by Social Status? (Seeking respect, competing?)

Moderately. The user seems motivated by attention rather than respect, as evidenced by their provocative posts and self-referential comments (e.g., "It would be an honor to be banned" [2025-05-11]). They compete for attention in the forum by escalating their rhetoric but don’t appear to seek admiration or status in a traditional sense.

 

11. Risk Tolerance (Bold vs. cautious, comfortable with uncertainty?)

High. The user is bold and comfortable with uncertainty, frequently risking bans or backlash with inflammatory comments (e.g., "I’m close to being kicked off" [2025-05-11]). Their willingness to push boundaries (e.g., crude remarks about public figures) suggests they thrive on the chaos of potential consequences.

 

12. Moral/Ethical Framework (Fairness, empathy, or utilitarian?)

The user’s framework appears to lack empathy and fairness, leaning toward a self-serving, utilitarian approach where the goal is personal amusement or disruption. Comments like "I don’t recycle. Just my little way of being MAGA" (2025-04-17) suggest a performative rejection of ethical norms to provoke. There’s no evidence of a consistent moral stance beyond opposition to certain groups (e.g., MAGA, religious wrestlers).

 

13. Cognitive Biases (Confirmation bias, black-and-white thinking?)

• Confirmation Bias: High. The user repeatedly targets political figures and groups (e.g., Trump, MAGA supporters) with consistent disdain, ignoring nuance or alternative perspectives. They seem to seek out opportunities to reinforce their negative views.
• Black-and-White Thinking: High. They categorize people and ideas simplistically (e.g., "Dumbass MAGA people," "PSU bible wackos"), showing little tolerance for complexity or gray areas.
• Hyperbole Bias: Evident in exaggerated claims (e.g., "Trump weighs 224 lbs," "The fat man destroyed the U.S.") to amplify their point.

14. Creative or Conformist? (Original vs. conventional?)

Moderately creative. While their trolling relies on conventional tactics (insults, crude humor), they occasionally use vivid or absurd imagery (e.g., "Justin Trudeau will continue to rail Melania with fat donald hiding in his closet watching" [2025-04-16]). However, their repetitive focus on certain themes (politics, personal attacks) limits their originality.

 

15. Attachment Style (Secure, anxious, avoidant?)

Likely avoidant. The user maintains emotional distance through sarcasm and hostility, avoiding genuine connection or vulnerability. Their provocative style suggests a lack of need for approval (anxious) or balanced relationships (secure), focusing instead on disruption and detachment.

 

16. Response to Stress (Calm, lashing out, withdrawing?)

The user likely responds to stress by lashing out. Their aggressive, confrontational tone (e.g., "The President of the United States is a gobsmacking moron" [2025-04-04]) suggests they channel frustration or stress into verbal attacks rather than withdrawing or remaining calm.

 

17. Cultural Influence? (Language/values hinting at background?)

The user’s language (e.g., "Merica," "libtard") and focus on American politics (Trump, MAGA, tariffs) suggest a U.S.-centric cultural background, possibly leaning toward a liberal or anti-conservative stance. Their mockery of religious and conservative figures (e.g., "PSU bible wackos," "Trump could become the next Pope" [2025-04-22]) hints at a secular, urban, or progressive cultural influence, though their crude humor aligns with broader internet trolling culture. References to specific American locales (e.g., "trailer park in Alabama" [2025-06-01]) reinforce a U.S. context.

 

18. Tone, Emoji Use, and Post Length

• Tone: Sarcastic, mocking, and hostile. The user frequently uses biting humor (e.g., "Cockroaches live forever" [2025-05-21]) and derogatory nicknames ("Fat Donald," "trumpy"). Even neutral topics are met with cynicism or insults.
• Emoji Use: None observed in the provided comments, which is unusual for a troll, as emojis often amplify provocation. This absence suggests a reliance on text-based sarcasm.
• Post Length: Mostly short (1–2 sentences), with occasional longer rants (e.g., the April 4, 2025, tariff post). Short posts align with trolling’s goal of quick, impactful provocation.

19. Scott Adams’ "Loserthink" and Mike Cernovich’s "Midwit"

• Loserthink (Scott Adams): Yes, the user fits Adams’ definition of "loserthink," which describes unproductive thinking patterns like emotional reasoning, hyperbole, and tribalism. Their reliance on insults, lack of evidence, and black-and-white thinking (e.g., dismissing entire groups like MAGA supporters) reflects this. They prioritize emotional venting over rational discourse.
• Midwit (Mike Cernovich): Likely. Cernovich’s implied "midwit" describes someone with average intelligence who overestimates their insight, often parroting popular opinions in a performative way. The user’s simplistic insults and lack of nuanced reasoning (e.g., "The fat man is the laughing stock of the world" [2025-04-04]) suggest they fit this mold, expressing anti-conservative views in a way that seeks attention but lacks depth.

20. Are they an asshole?

Yes, by common standards, the user’s behavior qualifies as "asshole-like." Their comments are consistently rude, offensive, and dismissive of others’ dignity (e.g., crude remarks about Melania Trump, mocking wrestlers’ academics or appearance). They show little regard for civility or constructive dialogue, prioritizing provocation over respect.

[El Luchador]

This is pretty amazing.  I wonder how the responses their posts receive affects their assessment.