Ask Your Question today
Title says it all. Do you think this site is a good representation?
| Yes. This site is a good representation of people. | 25 | |
| No. Only the weirdest people come here. | 27 | |
| Nobody is "normal" | 81 | |
| Other | 8 |
A bit funny how 2 comments say no and both have thumbs up, yet nobody voted no so far.
I'm never sure whether we're supposed to vote *and* write an answer or vote *or* write an answer. I assumed the second so you don't double-count. The reason I answered it rather than just voted is because my answers are usually long and by answering with just one word, it carries an implication that I couldn't have intended with just voting.
I'd be curious to know if the majority would want people to vote *and* write, though. If someone writes a post about it and the majority want that, I'll do it in future. :)
I can't answer no, only the weirdest come here because I don't believe that to be true. But this place is neither a good representation of normal nor the weirdest display of people.
I think it represents what a group of people online would think is normal but I feel that what people vote normal isn't always so much because they think it is normal but that they think it is acceptable.
"IIN to be not afraid of death/dying" no, it's not normal. Most people are afraid to die. Most of us take measures to avoid death. But questions like that are voted normal anyway because it's not necessarily a character flaw to accept death and not fear it's arrival, whereas even the most preliminary sociological study into it would indicate that the human race in general has trouble accepting death.
I would take your "Normal" rating with a grain of salt. Most of the people on this site are liberal and have laissez-faire attitudes regarding how people should live and think. In the real world, what the general populace as a whole views as normal could be very different.
Eh, not entirely. I suppose the place does attract people with weird stories to share. I think that's the point.
However, there are loads of different people here. Different ages, nationalities, beliefs, religions, etc. Because of that I think we get a lot of variety in the comments, which is very good, in my opinion. So you get to find out what's considered normal to lots of different people.
I think normality is pretty hard to define anyway. I don't think so, though, mainly for the first reason.
Not entirely, while we do have some nice variety for being such a small community many groups are underrepresented, and in general I've noticed on here people being more openminded and tolerant of other lifestyles which could skew the results in relation to the real world.
Truth is, there are so many potentialities that factor into normality it would be a bit dizzying to even have a set system for determining it. We're just a group of semi-likeminded people, giving advice and being weirdos on the internet.
I don't think it accurately represents what's normal and what isn't. One of the biggest problems is that some people vote considering what actually is normal or not, and other people vote considering what they do. For example: is it normal to have sex with my dog? "yes, I do it too". It's not normal but the person does it so he/she votes normal. I don't know if I explained myself well, haha whatever :)
I'm not entirely sure. I think we come to different conclusions than if you took twenty people off the street, but I don't think that's necessarily related to our normality.
I think it may simply be that the people that frequent this site are more exposed to other ways of life, different ideas, and all sorts of different things. I know that I've learned a lot from both the stories and comments that have been posted here.
So I don't think it's that we're really abnormal, but that we are simply aware of these things and so can have an easier time judging without immediately answering in the negative.
It's subjective, to what people consider as normal. Just because someone might perceive something as not normal, it doesn't mean it's unnatural.
Not exactly, but I'm not sure if it's close or far.
I often wonder if IIN attracts people who are quite similar and "not normal", or whether IIN attracts everyone equally but they're more honestly and it turns everyone underneath really is quite similar, and so we are all normal. I think the first option is more likely than the second, so we're probably not a good cross-section of society. For one thing, there's too few of us. You'd need thousands to represent society proportionally.
Oh, and I'll make sure I vote, OP :)