Ok done... and registered for my first point (if you don't mind!). Enjoyed the probability questions.

Issues I had were,

• inadequate categorisation of political views.
• inadequate categorisation for morality. I don't think many people here would answer deontologist, I don't know what Eliezers consequentialism is, so its basically a choice of consequentialism or other.

Most of the caterogies are well established and main stream umbrella terms that assume a good corelation between category and view set. Actually I think they should be avoided as associating with them comes down to tacitly agreeing with more than one proposition. So more single proposition (for/against) questions would be better ...

• for question about charity. You should reread the options, its like asking for 1-10, but listing only 3,4.5 and 9 bananas.
• existential risk. Would say nuclear war/climate change are the most likely, but not the most likely to wipe out 90%+ of the population, needless to say my answer cannot represent this.

Overall I thought it was good stuff.