I am just a bit tired of seeing people masquerade as "chaotic" when in truth it is only Chaotic + Evil that has anything to do with destroying things on a whim, and that whim is actually your emotional-derived decision, not just a random action. Chaotic in the sense of alignment is based on how you act, and that action being derived from feelings, emotions, and conscience is considered chaotic, as it is not defined by an "order" or "code". It does not mean that you are literally chaotic and just break things for the sake of breaking things. Chaotic does not mean insane.
And Lawful is usually played in the most boring of ways, Janus being the only one who seems to understand how Lawful Evil works from what I've seen in all honesty. Everyone assumes it means a strict adherence to policies, rules, or a code that was set either by a group or government or faction. Generally this is only the case if you're loyal to said party. Lawful also means you may follow your own set of codes or morals, which some may believe is chaotic, but those rules are set in stone and are unchanging, much unlike your emotions that are an ever-conflicting stream of crazy(non-literal crazy).
Neutral is most often thought of in the way that Chaotic is actually defined, in that said person whom claims to be neutral will act in a way that will benefit themselves the greatest because they only care about themselves (greed/envy/etc - Chaotic Neutral), and do not follow rules but are not batpoodoo insane. This is essentially the description of the combined alignment known as Chaotic Neutral, in that you make emotionally derived or non-standard choices based on your situation, and are neutral in the good v evil scheme of things, perhaps seeing the two as merely two sides to the same coin or something to that effect. Neutral in the law v chaos spectrum, however, is applied a bit differently, and is often harder to conceive in one's character due to the fact that it actually requires a bit of forethought and planning, and is much more intellectually involved than the concept of law or chaos, as Lawful behave based on a code, Chaos on emotion and such, while Neutral is actually much more difficult to describe.
Neutral characters believe that the two whom act within the realm of Lawfulness are just the same as those whom act chaotically, and both are delusional in their debates of the two "sides", while Neutral act objectively to every situation and decision in order to reach a desired goal, one which is usually dependent on their Good - Neutral(True) - Evil scale. The way I describe this is that Lawful people act subjectively based on their rules and codes, chaotic people act subjectively based on their emotions, and neutrals act objectively based on what is perceived as the best course of action for the best possible result. As such, I often see myself as neutral in these alignments(as far as Lawful and Chaotic go), as I am able to act in ways that I see being the best decision, while others act in ways that fit their schemes or ideals.
And the "test" that Ashe described was a very accurate survey which goes down a list of 36 questions that basically try to find out how you would act in each of the 36 scenarios, and its flaws are covered by the way it gives you a soft answer to describe what you most often act as, while it then scales down from each alignment combination (Lawful/Good to Chaotic/Evil as an example) with a "hit count" that basically says you are more often than not going to act this way, while you may on occasion act like this, and then rarely act like so. I, for example, got a score of 27 on Neutral & Evil combo, with a 4 on Lawful Good and a 2 on Chaotic Neutral.
Edit: The test results detail a score for each alignment combination to explain that you are not locked into one alignment, but are capable of all of them, with a score to sort of detail your likelihood to act in such a way.
