Angry Juju said:
When you see the % of people with aspergers, then look at the number of people on those threads who claim they have it. You know that they look at 1 or 2 of the effects on wikipedia and diagnose themselves with it. Especially considering how not all of the effects are necessarily negative.
Also, if you think that common sense makes you "WTF YOU'RE SO SMAT" then obviously you can tick the 'slightly below average' box. If you look at what I said and think "It's something I lack but wish I had" then you should tick the 'above average' box. I never said that common sense was a gauge of intelligence, I said I have common sense.
And finally, look at some of the posts on this thread. There are a bunch of people who think getting straight As in their exams make them a genius. In my A level history I managed to get an A, but then I literally got that A for learning the bare minimum in class, not studying at all and then writing the exam to the proper structure.
My point was that the sampling of people in those threads who said they have Aspergers is in no way reflective of what percent of Escapists think they have Aspergers. I SPECIFICALLY said "Whether they're lying or not" because the people who claim it in those threads have a reason to claim it (even if it's only to forward a point). A large percent of people claiming to have Aspergers in a thread about Aspergers does not correlate to an anonymous poll about intelligence (or an anonymous poll about Aspergers for that matter). I couldn't care less whether it's obvious they're lying or not, because it was a bad example in the first place.
What's more, a few posts with people who think "woot straight A's, I'm a genius" doesn't instantly invalidate my point. Hell, if you manage to get straight A's you probably are more likely to be slightly above average in intelligence (which is what I suspect most people around here are). I know in my school you actually had to have critical thinking skills and exemplary work to get an A from most teachers (though I'm well aware that may not be the case for everyone). However, I'm basing my views on the demographic and the overall level of intelligence I've seen displayed on this site, not a few misinformed individuals.
As to your intellectual gauge, I'm sorry, I just assumed you meant something else as your actual point makes even less sense. The degree to which you find something impressive in no way accurately correlates to how smart you are. Especially when that thing is a very specific aspect of the overall thing you're trying to gauge. If someone has common sense, then they're naturally going to find it less impressive. They may not even be very smart, but since they possess common sense they may consider it an extremely unremarkable talent. By that logic, they might consider themselves geniuses when they clearly aren't. Similarly, a genius who mostly lacks "common sense" might consider it a notable gift, and thus might consider themselves about average by that logic. Furthermore, some people, regardless of intelligence, are more or less impressed by different things, which adds more variables. Still a pretty bad gauge.