Those of you familiar with me know this much. I am far more socially permissive now than I was when I first arrived on the site. I'm no anarchist, but I am not the ranting "populist" that I was when I first came here. The change, which was accompanied by a move to the moderate fiscal right, occurred while the site was down and for reasons that I have already enumerated.
Now, my score on the political compass was -5.00 to the left and -2.62 libertarian when I was trying to box myself into a radical egalitarian stance. Now my score is 5.25 to the right and -1.90 libertarian, preposterously claiming that I am slightly less of a social libertarian than I was a month ago. Coupling that with the claim of a libertarian (i.e. libertarian right) website that politicalcompass.org is run by "anarcho-socialists" and tries to portray economic right-wingers as inevitably having authoritarian tendencies, I have to suspect that the site confuses social libertarianism with social egalitarianism, the latter being part of a mindset of the economic left. If more evidence were needed (IMO), this claim is confirmed by the fact that an avowed member of the American Communist Party on this very site finished as a social libertarian.
In spite of all of this, another website, which is run by an open leftist, claims that the compass is actually biased towards the libertarian right quadrant. This person claims that the propositions themselves are slanted in such a way as to give a libertarian right-wing result. On the other hand, politicalcompass.org itself claims to be unbiased (of course).

It doesn't cover all issues obviously and it does put a lot of weight on the general personality questions. Personally when I take the test, I have to put myself in political mode, because I am personally conservative on a lot of issues. For instance I don't consider art without a representation to be art and I think people are way to open about sex. But because I do not believe that my feelings should be pushed on others, I claim to disagree with these statements. Another thing is the lack of "neutral" category. On one hand this forces you to pick lesser of two evils, but on the other it simplifies the issues. On many fiscal issues, I would answer "depends" or something along those lines, therefore I slide a bit on the fiscal scale from time to time.
But all in all I'd say the compass is the least flawed of political tests and the one that is most consistant.

Now, I could be wrong, but it appears to me that you're saying that the test has an authoritarian bias. I also have to go into "political mode" when I take it, though about the fiscal rather than the social issues. For example, I am by nature an egalitarian, but I recognize that anything near the lower left corner is impracticable, so I think pragmatically when I take that test. I know that you are basically in the fiscal center (or just slightly left of it), but do you think that right-wing libertarians have a valid point about a possible left libertarian bias?

the bias is all in bad questions that are subject to interpretation. Just because one hates abstract art, is personally against sex talk, and other things along that nature doesn't mean that they side politically with the associated parties or ideological groups. I think the test is programmed with assumptions. It's more of a methodological error problem than a bias problem.

Why do you suppose that I went up a notch on the test? (BTW, it's getting a bit slow in the off-topic forum.)

In order for me to truly know I'd have to see all of your answers from each time and compare them. I am not entirely sure how the mechanics work, I just know that assumptions have to be made about some, especially the personality-type questions. I don't think it very likely that you moved on any of those.
But it's possible that some fiscal questions you changed answers on could have resulted in a change in social score. In our model of left-right politics, questions are often asked that pit fiscal freedom against social freedom. It's not so much a bias as a product of the accepted political model. In which case it would be a bias toward either conservative or liberal, making it less likely to fall into a populist or libertarian mold. But again, I'm not sure exactly how the test scores, so I don't actually know which outcomes are more likely than others or how exactly it quantifies each response.

I think that it equates extreme social egalitarianism (which I abandoned for pragmatic reasons) with extreme social libertarianism. That is the only way in which I can imagine a member of the ACP being called a social libertarian. If I am wrong, then the propositions must be very badly worded. I think that the ultimate test would be having stekim take the quiz. He would, of course, be well to the right, but if, as a suspect, he would be labeled at something like -2 or -3 libertarian (he should be -5 or -6, at least), I think that my egalitarian versus libertarian theory about the site would be proven correct. Do you agree?

I have no idea. We'd really have to do some experimenting to find out. Sounds a bit tedious.

I haven't seen stekim in a while, but I also want him to settle what the proper definition of the term paleolibertarian is, since rockyreagan and I disagreed on the subject.

Isn't that a libertarian that's as old as the dinosaurs?