What did you get on chesspersonality.com?

Technician for me!

got prodigy, probably i'm a prodigy for being bad at chess

You can take that retarded test 10 times, and get 6 different answers. 

only if you change your answers

Natural - BUT I wasn't strongly inclined one way or the other on any of the measures (unlike the natural profile that is).

First time i took it i got Kramnik..

And it successfully guessed 2 of the  3 openings i play!

In the years since, i have gotten Karpov, Capa, Nimzo, Tal, and most recently Stienitz.

My scores are always in the middle.

Never 4-1, or 5-0.

I'm a mad scientist.

Mastermind...hah....I'm really just a punter.

I got barbarian cause once the game starts I open fire straight away, no messing about! 

1 -2 ,terminator coming for you! 

And for higher rated players it will be a more stable result.  But if you look over the other posts on the site, who started the posts, there rating, etc.  The vast majority of them are low rated, that pretty much tend to "test out" as Tal, "tactical "aggressive"  In the grand scheme of things, does it matter? No...I just think some people base there answers on what they wish for and not who they are.

Same story with me; I took the test several times with months between them too and I also got the same results (I was "Technician" each time instead of "Assassin", but the fact that I [or anyone] got the same results as before was the point). 

I am not sure how your personality can change so much IMBacon. Maybe your chess style has shifted a lot by experimenting with new ideas - causing your personality to change? 

Like BobbyTalparov alluded, I like the test validity and I am not sure your chess personality can really change; it is what is more natural/intuitive; In this way, personality I'd expect to almost never shift/change.

I want to test out as Rodney Dangerfield...

If that test was truly accurate i would test as: Someone that loves the game, doesn't take it as serious anymore, hardly ever plays OTB tournaments, but still enjoys going to tournaments.  Extra credit if the tournament is at a casino, and there is a nice buffet close by. 

That would be my style.

magician!

http://www.chesspersonality.com/type/magician

Yeah, that is basically what I was getting at; sounds simple the way you put it though - but yes this is more-or-less what was meant.

What is true of most clustering methods (including this one) is they can "tell you how many lumps there are in the pudding" but not necessarily that you are part of one of those lumps. As I said, I tested out rather wishy washy on all measures. Wishy-Washy wasn't one of the options and I got assigned to a lump that at best I'm that way sometimes.

Likewise, in terms of openings that it suggests for my supposed style, I play none of them seriously.

For people who are strongly inclined on the various measures, this may put them in a correct lump. But I suspect for many of us, assigning us to a lump is pretty weak as we don't really fit well. We are out in the pudding somewhere.

And I also agree that weaker players are less likely to be strongly associated with any lump other than bad. Someone might like to think of themselves as a barbarian or a tactician, but in reality, all they are is a bad barbarian or a bad tactician.

So many of the questions are ambiguous to me. Or meaningless.

Like is your first instinct to capture on g5?

It is the first variation i would analyze. It is tactical, after all. Thete might be a quick win there. Only way to know for sure is to look.

But 90% likely i wouldnt choose it. I dont take a lot of risks. 

And what is there to analyze in Bg3?

So i could honestly answer either, without setting off a lie detector.

Ive seen that before.

Makes me wonder if Kramnik got Naka?

Is like Elvis, losing an Elvis impersonator contest