Conversation with Anthony Sepulveda (Brown) on Liam Millikan and Lessons: Member, World Genius Directory (7)
Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen
Publication (Outlet/Website): In-Sight: Independent Interview-Based Journal
Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2020/12/08
Abstract
Anthony Sepulveda scored 174 (S.D.15) on Cosmic and is a member of the World Genius Directory. He discusses: a recent controversy in the high-IQ communities; some of the interesting presentations; Liam Millikan; why he left; his reputation; the “encounter”; the scores earned by him; his reputation now; a “traitor”; forgotten; his reasoning for doing this; other possible coinciding reasons for his disillusionment with the community; this isn’t a fake name and profile of another person; stealing of problems and passing off as their own; the modifications; the immediate community; the communities’ tests; compromised tests; Ivec, Predavec, Dorsey, or the fourth test creator; roughly even split; the fallout; “kicked” out of the community; the merits of his “work”; the lessons to be learned; the reasoning provided by Millikan, and the interpretations of the high-IQ communities; were they “not unjustified”; the possible “interesting places”; the potential for exploration; places to read more about this; the silence; and contact with Millikan.
Keywords: Anthony Sepulveda, intelligence, IQ, lessons, Liam Millikan, World Genius Directory.
Conversation with Anthony Sepulveda (Brown) on Liam Millikan and Lessons: Member, World Genius Directory (7)
*Please see the footnotes, bibliography, and citation style listing after the interview.*
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: So, let’s talk about a recent controversy in the high-IQ communities, such as they disparately are, what is the overview of the Liam Millikan case, which was brought to personal attention by you?
Anthony Sepulveda (Brown)[1],[2]*: He created a social media page called High Range Tests Exposed, openly shared the answers to several tests he’d taken and how he arrived at those answers.
Jacobsen: What were some of the interesting presentations from the page?
Sepulveda (Brown): I was struck by which tests and problems he chose to focus on and why. He seemed intent on exposing only problems that were flawed or stolen.
Jacobsen: Who is Liam Millikan?
Sepulveda (Brown): A former member of the High IQ Community.
Jacobsen: Why did he leave?
Sepulveda (Brown): He was removed for unethical behavior.
Jacobsen: What was his reputation prior to this incident or series of incidences?
Sepulveda (Brown): I encountered him on social media, but I never saw anything noteworthy enough to remember anything about him. Aside from that, I can’t say much. From his posts and the scores he received on the tests he took, he’s clearly an intelligent, insightful individual that cares more about objective truth than subjective opinions.
Jacobsen: What was the “encounter”?
Sepulveda (Brown): He and I had several mutual contacts from within the community and I used to be interested in including such people in my virtual social circle. Sadly, we didn’t interact much at all and I didn’t remember I had a way to contact him until after his account was deleted.
Jacobsen: What were the scores earned by him?
Sepulveda (Brown): Many of the test answers he shared are believed to correlate to an IQ in the upper 170’s.
Jacobsen: What is his reputation now?
Sepulveda (Brown): By many, if not most community members he’s considered a traitor best forgotten.
Jacobsen: Why a “traitor”?
Sepulveda (Brown): He betrayed the trust of the community. The only difference between those who are and are not members is the ability to arrive at answers to difficult questions on your own. If people were to cheat their way in, then membership would completely pointless.
Jacobsen: Why “best forgotten”?
Sepulveda (Brown): Just a personal assumption based on how little I’ve heard of the incident since.
Jacobsen: What was his reasoning for doing this?
Sepulveda: (Brown): It seems that he’d become disillusioned of the community. In his posts, he’d share either the answers he’d submitted on a specific test and the resulting score from them or he’d focus on one specific problem and reveal its flaws. On several occasions, he provided evidence that certain problems had been stolen from earlier tests and slightly modified by other test designers.
Jacobsen: What are other possible coinciding reasons for his disillusionment with the community?
Sepulveda (Brown): I imagine he went through a similar process that I went through when I first joined Mensa. Initially, I was very excited to meet verified peers that I could have interesting conversations with. When I arrived to the hall hosting our next monthly meeting, I was disappointed to find that I was the youngest person there by roughly 20 years and the conversations were mostly limited to people arguing and quoting famous intellectuals.
Jacobsen: How do we know this isn’t a fake name and profile of another person?
Sepulveda (Brown): If you’re interested in submitting answers to an HRT, you have to definitely prove your identity by providing photos of yourself, your passport and ID. It seems pretty unlikely that he’d forge such documents to join a High IQ Society, but I suppose it’s not impossible.
Sidenote – he did use an alias on the HRT’s Exposed page called Kana Kana.
Jacobsen: What does this stealing of problems and passing off as their own mean for test designers in the independent psychometrician community?
Sepulveda (Brown): I wish it was frowned upon more than it is, but with a certain amount of modification it’s almost impossible to be certain of any wrongdoing.
Jacobsen: How were these modified, generally speaking?
Sepulveda (Brown): The examples he provided were spatial problems stolen from Robert Lato. In these cases, one could simply alter any superfluous parts of the design to create something that looks unique.
Jacobsen: What was the immediate community reaction?
Sepulveda (Brown): I was initially notified of the issue by Jason Betts, who was frantically trying to get enough people to report the High Range Tests Exposed page and have it pulled from social media. Most went through with his request immediately. But I was curious and decided to join the page and got to look at his work for a few minutes before everything was deleted.
Jacobsen: What is the result on the communities’ tests that were compromised or the test constructors who had tests compromised?
Sepulveda (Brown): It doesn’t seem like anything has changed since then.
Jacobsen: What tests did he compromise?
Sepulveda (Brown): 12 tests total (sadly, I don’t remember all of them) designed by James Dorsey, Ivan Ivec, Mislav Predavec and, I believe, one other who I’m not familiar with.
Jacobsen: Any commentary from Ivec, Predavec, Dorsey, or the fourth?
Sepulveda (Brown): Only intense anger at Liam for compromising their work and at me for respecting his decision.
Jacobsen: Was it 3 per person or unequally split?
Sepulveda (Brown): It was nearly equal.
Jacobsen: What has been the fallout or reaction as the dust has settled?
Sepulveda (Brown): Not much, surprisingly. Now that the answers have been deleted, it seems that the test designers have elected to keep the tests as they were, Liam was kicked out of the community and life seems to be proceeding as usual. Which is why I mentioned it to you. I feel that his actions were taken too personal too soon and judgment passed too swiftly. The merits of his work would have been obvious to anyone that took an impartial look at it. Which can only lead to better tests if we had learned from it.
Jacobsen: How was he “kicked” out of the community?
Sepulveda (Brown): His name was removed from most listings and he is no longer allowed admission into any group within the community or allowed to take tests from most designers.
Jacobsen: What were the merits of his “work”?
Sepulveda (Brown): Despite the rude and unethical nature with which he acted, he never said anything that I didn’t completely agree with. The community finds itself in such poor condition because a few within it are unwilling to accept criticism or consider the possibility that they’re wrong. They’ve mislead it into a place of stagnation.
Jacobsen: What do you consider the lessons to be learned?
Sepulveda (Brown): We need to be more humble and accept the fact that we all make mistakes. We can be dead certain of something and still get it all wrong.
Jacobsen: What is your own opinion on this matter and the reasoning provided by Millikan, and the interpretations of the high-IQ communities?
Sepulveda (Brown): I personally believe that, while his actions were unethical, they were not unjustified. Simply put, if the tests are flawed, then the results from them are invalid and they hold no value. If the tests are invalid, then there’s no real harm in sharing the answers. It’s a shame that no one else took the time to judge his work for themselves because we might have lead to some very interesting places.
Jacobsen: Why were they “not unjustified”?
Sepulveda (Brown): Perhaps ‘unjustified’ isn’t as good a word as inexcusable. We all make mistakes and I am no exception.
Jacobsen: What were the possible “interesting places”?
Sepulveda (Brown): One major issue I have with HRT’s is that they aren’t peer reviewed. All too often they are designed, published and scored by the same person and the overall quality of the problems varies widely because of it. If we were to honestly question and objectively examine the tests we use for admission by a dedicated group of experienced individuals, I’d be very interested to see what makes it through.
Jacobsen: Would the potential for the exploration of the possible “interesting places” outweigh the risks?
Sepulveda (Brown): Definitely.
Jacobsen: Where can others read more about this?
Sepulveda (Brown): I don’t believe they can at the moment. The community’s been quiet on the subject since while I’ve been trying to get in contact with Liam myself. But he’s deleted his social media accounts and no one’s been willing to share his contact info with me.
Jacobsen: Why the silence of wind in outer space on the matter?
Sepulveda (Brown): I don’t know. We can only grow as a community by confronting these situations directly and fairly. Perhaps it’s just too painful a process for others to pursue.
Jacobsen: Why pursue contact with Millikan?
Sepulveda (Brown): I have several questions for him. And if he’s interested, I’d like to collaborate with him.
Appendix I: Footnotes
[1] Member, World Genius Directory.
[2] Individual Publication Date: December 8, 2020: http://www.in-sightjournal.com/sepulveda-7; Full Issue Publication Date: January 1, 2021: https://in-sightjournal.com/insight-issues/.
*High range testing (HRT) should be taken with honest skepticism grounded in the limited empirical development of the field at present, even in spite of honest and sincere efforts. If a higher general intelligence score, then the greater the variability in, and margin of error in, the general intelligence scores because of the greater rarity in the population.
License
In-Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. Based on a work at www.in-sightpublishing.com.
Copyright
© Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing 2012-Present. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this site’s author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Scott Douglas Jacobsen and In-Sight Publishing with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. All interviewees and authors co-copyright their material and may disseminate for their independent purposes.
In-Sight Publishing 