Player Self Evaluation: Fill & Download for Free

I have seen some evidence for “introverted”. “Socially awkward” or “shy”, not so much, though one could say “withdrawn”. See Bruno Campello de Souza's answer to Are intelligent people more likely to be alone?As for “effeminate”, I think it is more ambiguous.There is some data suggesting that, in men, a higher IQ might be somewhat associated to a somewhat less masculine face, as stated below:Faces that are perceived as highly intelligent are rather prolonged with a broader distance between the eyes, a larger nose, a slight upturn to the corners of the mouth, and a sharper, pointing, less rounded chin. By contrast, the perception of lower intelligence is associated with broader, more rounded faces with eyes closer to each other, a shorter nose, declining corners of the mouth, and a rounded and massive chin.see Perceived Intelligence Is Associated with Measured Intelligence in Men but Not WomenAlso, there is plenty of data indicating that those wth higher IQs tend to have higher income and occupy more prominent positions.Some data of my own, from adults in the state of Pernambuco, Brazil, suggests that, in terms of attitudes and social dominance, things might go the opposite way.Among undergraduate students of Business Administration at the Federal University of Pernambuco, there was a positive association between a Leadership Index and IQ.Even though the index is based on self-evaluation, it has been shown to be associated to occupying leadership positions at work, creating one’s own business and having a good relationship with subordinates (when one has them). So, there is good reason to believe that it is indeed measuring something akin to leadership.Among a broader ste of 1,777 adults in various municipalities in Pernambuco, IQ was found to be positively associated to self-evaluations of social trais related to assertiveness.Right now, it seems to me that high IQ individuals can be very “alpha” or “dominant” indeed, though perhaps they do not have such “rugged” facial features.Update (19/07/2019)The following exchange might give high IQ men some hope.

Watch instructional YouTube videos developed by people who coach basketball for a living.Use a mirror to self-evaluate your shooting form.Practice, practice, practice. Dribble a ball with you wherever you go. But it’s about practice and dedication to the fundamentals. You are never too good to go back and review your fundamentals.

Eh… how about “I don't give a rat's ass about Top Writer" or any other Quora cliquish little self-congratulatory group? And I will never change how I write things just so I can be selected into some irrelevant group of nothing?But, fine, let me engage a little bit of self-evaluation… hum… I just remembered something: every time someone gets all excited about some online community “honorary title", I think of this:I suggest the next time you feel like you need to list “TW, 201X- 201X" right next to you name, think about this.Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against individuals who are top writers. In fact, I enjoy many Top Writer answers and I think many Top Writers are indeed great people. I maintain good relationships with many of them online. I like them, I like their content. My attitude towards them will not change whether they're TW or not.I'm also not against honors given to community members who have contribute good content. But TW is not about good content.Regular users have no visibility of how TW is nominated, evaluated, and selected. We don't know the criteria of selection. The entire process, like ALL other user related processed is a black hole. So we'll have to assume Quora employees sit together and select users who they believe to have contribute good content to the site.Now, we all know Quora product managers and upper management don't use their own product. So eventually it boils down to admins (who have the most interaction with regular players) submitting candidates, and they arbitrarily select a few people they think would represent Quora community's highest quality.As a result, you get some good people who end up becoming TW. But more often than not, you often get users who probably write 1 or 2 answers throughout the year, and occasionally, a Quora employee would get selected as TW. LOL, isn't it a joke. Even a lottery would ask their own employees not to participate. But hey, TW is totally objective. Right?You can say I'm just sour grapes about this whole thing. Well, I would be very honored if community members vote for TW. I probably still won't get TW because I piss off a lot of people, but I would feel that at least, there's some substance in the title. Right now, the TW title is empty. It means nothing other than a small group of irrelevant people who don’t even use Quora everyday somehow arbitrarily finds you "worthy" of a made up title.And you want me to do a little bit of self-reflection and think about how I could change so these small group of irrelevant people would evaluate me differently?No. I will not do that. I will not waste my time.PS: to those who are somehow made into “TW" and somehow under the (wrong) impression that we all so covet your irrelevant title of nothing, I suggest you refrain from giving unsolicited advice on how people should behave themselves. Consider this a friendly reminder, just in case you didn't realize just how condescending that “advice” sounds like.