If you have "no place to go," come here!

Congratulate me, I'm a Gen-Xer!


My score was 35!

No votes yet


a little night musing's picture
Submitted by a little night ... on

But I almost got stopped by the first question. Does watching downloaded TV series count?

So I'm a silent generation member. Hmm. I question the accuracy of this test. [/sarcasm]

Submitted by jawbone on

But I don't have tats, text or do the social networking sites (altho I forgot I have signed up for Tweeter when Hipparchia urged us to do so for another way to contact pols -- just haven't used it). Eh.

Does this mean I'll go silently into that good night?

aspen's picture
Submitted by aspen on

on the elder side of boomer, too. and i'm actually gen-x. this means i'm my parents! noooooooo!!1111 ;)

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

I guess I do play the hell out of my xbox (FIFA 10 baby!) and text more than i talk on the phone...

In real life, I am in between Gen-X and Gen-Y. I don't really fit into either of those generalized groups all that well.

MoveThatBus's picture
Submitted by MoveThatBus on

Not a very accurate survey, IMHO. My guess is that the youngsters who created it are unaware of when technology started. I always enjoyed it when these young HR folk would ask me if I was comfortable using a computer!!

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

I got 51 too!

I'm somewhere between X and Millennial?

Heck, I was using a Commodore 64 before some of these younguns were born! Darn kids, get offa my lawn!

a little night musing's picture
Submitted by a little night ... on

I use a lot of technogadgets, just not the ones they asked about.

But there must be more to it. Only 14 questions, many with only 2 or 3 answers? There must be some serious weighting going on.

(I'd try to figure it out, but I can't muster up the energy right now. But it would be fun to try sometime.)

ETA: I poked back through and changed one of my answers and it did not change my score. Hmm. But now I see that at the end you can see how changing an answer would change your score, and, for example, if I had answered "no" to whether I had contacted a government official in the past 12 months, my score would have gone up to 11. Still can't muster up the focus to look at the whole thing, but maybe sometime when I am both bored and awake...

Submitted by lambert on

... and not the daily newspapers. I answered no to all the media questions, because I don't. That, and being liberal.

So, "blog and grow rich" might not have worked out, but "blog and stay young" seems to have!

BDBlue's picture
Submitted by BDBlue on

I just took it as her and she dropped several generations (she's really a silent generation member).

From what I can tell, the quiz is crap, especially the tech questions. Hell, even my grandmother played solitaire on the computer (video games).

gqmartinez's picture
Submitted by gqmartinez on

Texting and social networking let's you keep in touch with so many more people. Even video games do--xbox and playstation let you play against people all over the world. My guess is that weighs heavily on the scoring. Social netowrking, video games and texting are much closer to real life interactions than blogging. That whole ,face to face" discussion was odd to me. Most of the people I communicate with online are folks I do see or would give a call if I were in their neighborhood.

Submitted by ralphb on

and I am an old boomer. The test is crap.

Valhalla's picture
Submitted by Valhalla on

leaning GenX. Which I think is crap. Kurt Cobain died when I was in law school, and my younger friends were rather distraught while I was all "Who's Kurt Cobain?" So that's my GenX test.

Age-wise I'm really too young for Boomers (my mom's generation) and too old for GenX. I'm in the no-person's-land cohort, really.

I'm only an 8 without the social networking (sadly, I'm on FB).

bah, humbug.

Valley Girl's picture
Submitted by Valley Girl on

omigod! This poll is well, groady. oh, and irrc, groady is Valley Girl speak.

I won't tell you what my score was, let's just say it was negligible. I mean, like, I am dead and buried already, fer shur.

Okay, so, like I don't have a tattoo, I don't have any pierced body parts except for my earlobes, I don't have a cell phone, and thus no text messages, I don't watch TV, I haven't created a public profile, I don't play video games.

I went back and changed my score to see what difference it would make if had I read a daily paper . That one confused me, because it did not specify online or paper copy. So, at first I thought "paper copy". But, when I went back and changed my score to take into account that I had read a daily paper in the last 24 hrs (online), my score was even lower.

Clearly, I'm a loser. Oh, and when I changed my score on the "have you contacted a pol in the last year" (or whatever it was) from yes to no, my score dropped even more. Great.

I got fed up and didn't try to figure out whether if I actually had a tattoo or other pierced places would make a difference.

Who knows? Maybe that's a big tell in the scoring.

Uh, Lambert, uh, how much difference did the tattoo and extra piercings count? (Okay, I don't know that you have either, but it was one weird poll, and raised questions for inquiring minds.)

Submitted by hipparchia on

and that's without texting, tattoos, or piercings.

according to their chart, as someone near the tail end of the boomers, i should score something like 17 or so. 58 puts me on the same level as about a 2729-year-old. ha! i soooo refuse to grow up!

madamab's picture
Submitted by madamab on

I'm GenX, or so I'm told. What's weird is that the test asks your age range, so the scoring seems rather suspect to me.

Submitted by gmanedit on

People sure like to take tests (I'm thinking back to the Meyers-Briggs thread a few days ago).

Watch this video ( about online game designers using psychology and social engineering to extract rents (use free play to get people hooked, then require subscription payments for deeper access). Could these principles be used to educate and organize people by rewarding them with points?

a little night musing's picture
Submitted by a little night ... on

Could these principles be used to educate and organize people by rewarding them with points?

It's like the bideo game thing discussed by David Ng at World's Fair:

I remember at the time, the talk led me to think a little more about the economics of such an endeavour (i.e. the making of games with these types of production values). Having a chance to see the EA campus, and noting that they even go so far as to have a full size stadium to capture visual nuances for their games (nevermind the remarkable technology on display in the video), it obviously must require a lot of funds to do this sort of thing.

And with a recent talk by Jane McGonigal in my mind (she of the advocating for game development to address real life issues) I can only assume that the type of funding involved there is probably not in the same league (could be wrong about that, but do let me know if you know more).

It's a question not only of funding - not quite so much an issue in the matter of developing quizzes, I guess - but of having the will to do it. In my experience, people on the left tend to veer away from such tools, viewing them as somehow dishonest or dirty or something, and seem to think just telling people what they should think will work (when obviously it doesn't). Personally I think there is nothing wrong with using methods of conveying information which are more persuasive, if you are using them to do good. After all, they are used without hesitation by people whose motives and information are neutral to highly suspect.

There's also the question of inducing people to take your little quiz, which means it would have to be subversively covertly didactic. I would love if someone could come up with how to do this. I'm quite certain it could be done. (I will try to think about it in my dreams, since that's about all the time I have these days!)

[I'm insanely jealous of your score of 1.]

michaelwb's picture
Submitted by michaelwb on

Hmm, I get a 57 which makes me a Millenial - even though I was born at the tail end of the technical Baby Boom and have more in common over the years with the Gen X folks.

I think this quiz simultaneously demonstrates the pointlessness of such quizzes and generational typecasting. Double Fail!

SashaCA's picture
Submitted by SashaCA on

I got an 82 which makes me Millennial (and I didn't even get to count my piercings in, um, non-traditional places, 'cause I removed the jewelry years ago and the holes closed up) though I'm actually Gen-X.

As far as weighting of the questions is concerned, I noticed that you get 20 points for not watching more than an hour of TV in the last 24 hours. We don't do TV anymore; here's why: About 6 years ago we moved into a new house at a time when the local cable company was very busy, and it took 4 weeks to get an appointment with the cable guy. At first we were like, "OMG! 4 weeks without TV; how are we going to manage?" But as the weeks passed, we realized how little we missed TV. Eventually the cable guy showed up and installed premium cable on every TV in the house. And then something interesting happened: As I started flipping through the channels, I noticed that I was getting increasingly depressed. The stereotyping and bigotry on the network TV shows, the neverending sexual objectification of women on the cable shows, the insipid commentary on the news programs, and of course the slew of commercials designed to make us feel bad about ourselves so we'll purchase x product or service all worked together to have a profoundly negative effect on my psyche. So when my SO was laid off, and we were forced to move to a smaller house, we decided that one of the things we could do without is TV. The few shows worth watching, we download (sans commercials), which means we virtually never watch more than 30-45 minutes of TV per day. I highly recommend it! You might be surprised how much happier you are without so much TV in your life.