The stereotype of ESFps as promiscuous

[Jarno]

Once again I had a negative encouter with an SEE. I think all SEE have these negative traits more or less in them.

It seems to me that they don't care about people themselves, but only care about the fun that people can support them with.
If they can't derive any pleasure from you or if they have someone else for their pleasure, you are considered to be a burden and will be dumped.
Which costs them no effort at all.

They are also great at turning things around. They want to do something or go somewhere, and tell you, we'll go there or do that, because you'll like it. As if they do it all for you, while it's just in favor of them.

To summarize, they are loyal as long as they have a need for you, don't truly care about people, and make themselves popular in a hypocritical way.

[Expat]

So why do you think they are your duals?

[Jarno]

I emphasized the negative traits which can be objectively noticed wether it's your dual or not.

The positive dual trait (dual feeling) is easy to notice, when interacting with them.

b.t.w. i'm not going into disputes wether this is my dual or not. Everyones dual can have traits that aren't good.

[Expat]

So which are the positive qualities that would compensate for those negative ones, in your view?

[Jarno]

So which are the positive qualities that would compensate for those negative ones, in your view?

Objectively speaking, they bring joy, fun and atmosphere.

In my view speaking (it seems like a covert attack on my type b.t.w. ...sigh...): Since it is my dual, I've been mostly counscious to the feelings that I get from them, like feeling total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone who I know very well. The things they say hit a spot, so to say. They surprise me again and again. You instantly get happy when being in their company.

[Jarno]

and make themselves popular in a hypocritical way.

how does that follow from anything else you said? i would have thought their tendency to wander from one "fun" thing to another would be a detriment to their overall popularity. and related to why ESFp fall under a democratic quadra. possible ESFp celebrities like Paris Hilton for example often have a love/hate relationship with the public (based on whether or not people like their Se.) ESFp strike me as conscious of their appearance (and all other things Se), but not so conscious of "popularity" itself (which i would associate more with Fe).

I meant, they give sort of complements in an insincere way. They do things which they claim are to make you happy while in fact it are things that make them happy in the first place. But well this is not something I encounter very often.

btw. paris hilton type has been disputed heavely on this forum.

[Expat]

(it seems like a covert attack on my type b.t.w. ...sigh

1) It was a straight question. You made the SEE seem (to me) like a person I wouldn't want to hang around with, so I asked what is it that you see in such a person.
2) Perhaps you won't believe me, but I neither see, nor intend, questioning of people's types as "attacks". Nor do I take any particular pleasure in doing so. I am often harsh, or "bitchy" with people whose types I also question, but that is because I think they deserve if for other reasons, not because of the type disagreement as such.

[Joy]

Once again I had a negative encouter with an SEE. I think all SEE have these negative traits more or less in them.

It seems to me that they don't care about people themselves, but only care about the fun that people can support them with.
If they can't derive any pleasure from you or if they have someone else for their pleasure, you are considered to be a burden and will be dumped.
Which costs them no effort at all.

They are also great at turning things around. They want to do something or go somewhere, and tell you, we'll go there or do that, because you'll like it. As if they do it all for you, while it's just in favor of them.

To summarize, they are loyal as long as they have a need for you, don't truly care about people, and make themselves popular in a hypocritical way.

I've had a lot of SEE friends, and not one has treated me this way. I've never had an SEE who wasn't my friend treat me with way, either. I could see immature SEE's treating people they particularly don't like this way though, I suppose.

[Jarno]

Once again I had a negative encouter with an SEE. I think all SEE have these negative traits more or less in them.

It seems to me that they don't care about people themselves, but only care about the fun that people can support them with.
If they can't derive any pleasure from you or if they have someone else for their pleasure, you are considered to be a burden and will be dumped.
Which costs them no effort at all.

They are also great at turning things around. They want to do something or go somewhere, and tell you, we'll go there or do that, because you'll like it. As if they do it all for you, while it's just in favor of them.

To summarize, they are loyal as long as they have a need for you, don't truly care about people, and make themselves popular in a hypocritical way.

I've had a lot of SEE friends, and not one has treated me this way. I've never had an SEE who wasn't my friend treat me with way, either. I could see immature SEE's treating people they particularly don't like this way though, I suppose.

yeah the SEE colleague's at my work don't treat me this way either. But that's probably cause the relationship is to casual.
But the things that I've written down are common known, I've seen more posts covering these things.

[Expat]

But the things that I've written down are common known, I've seen more posts covering these things.

Here?

[Jarno]

But the things that I've written down are common known, I've seen more posts covering these things.

Here?

Yes especially the part of getting dumped for something else.

[Phaedrus]

Jarno is perfectly right that SEEs can at least be perceived in the way he describes.

[liveandletlive]

Once again I had a negative encouter with an SEE. I think all SEE have these negative traits more or less in them.

It seems to me that they don't care about people themselves, but only care about the fun that people can support them with.
If they can't derive any pleasure from you or if they have someone else for their pleasure, you are considered to be a burden and will be dumped.
Which costs them no effort at all.

They are also great at turning things around. They want to do something or go somewhere, and tell you, we'll go there or do that, because you'll like it. As if they do it all for you, while it's just in favor of them.

To summarize, they are loyal as long as they have a need for you, don't truly care about people, and make themselves popular in a hypocritical way.

if you were to take away the SEEs in this post and replace it with ILIs the entire thing would still be applicable.
IME with ILIs, if you can't hold their attention 100% of the time you are with them, they bounce or have "wandering eyes." You guys wonder why ESFps tend to be superficial, only interested in fun... it's because you need us that way!

BTW, i have known several ILIs to have dumped others because they were considered a burden.

The last sentence can also be applied to ILIs too.

I could say more but I'll save it for the next post.

[reyn_til_runa]

So which are the positive qualities that would compensate for those negative ones, in your view?

Objectively speaking, they bring joy, fun and atmosphere.

In my view speaking (it seems like a covert attack on my type b.t.w. ...sigh...): Since it is my dual, I've been mostly counscious to the feelings that I get from them, like feeling total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone who I know very well. The things they say hit a spot, so to say. They surprise me again and again. You instantly get happy when being in their company.

uhm, generally a statement such as "they bring joy, fun, and atmsphere" cannot be objectively spoken.
so i see what you've done -- come up with a reason that this totally subjective experience could possibly be objectified. you try adequatlely, to your credit, but come on jarno. let me get this straight, you are "mostly" conscious of the feelings you get from them...total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone I know very well. the things they say hit a spot, so to say. they surprise me again and again. you get happy when being in their company." AND your feelings are mostly negative towards them? BIGGER AND "they bring joy, fun, and atmosphere" is considered an objective statement. i don't speak like this. i know you say this is not a discussion about your type, but either i am not ILI or you are not. you are far too subjective without seeming imaginative. in other words, you seem to think these experiences you quote actually ARE objectifiable.

[Jarno]

So which are the positive qualities that would compensate for those negative ones, in your view?

Objectively speaking, they bring joy, fun and atmosphere.

In my view speaking (it seems like a covert attack on my type b.t.w. ...sigh...): Since it is my dual, I've been mostly counscious to the feelings that I get from them, like feeling total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone who I know very well. The things they say hit a spot, so to say. They surprise me again and again. You instantly get happy when being in their company.

uhm, generally a statement such as "they bring joy, fun, and atmsphere" cannot be objectively spoken.
so i see what you've done -- come up with a reason that this totally subjective experience could possibly be objectified. you try adequatlely, to your credit, but come on jarno. let me get this straight, you are "mostly" conscious of the feelings you get from them...total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone I know very well. the things they say hit a spot, so to say. they surprise me again and again. you get happy when being in their company." AND your feelings are mostly negative towards them? BIGGER AND "they bring joy, fun, and atmosphere" is considered an objective statement. i don't speak like this. i know you say this is not a discussion about your type, but either i am not ILI or you are not. you are far too subjective without seeming imaginative. in other words, you seem to think these experiences you quote actually ARE objectifiable.

oh boy can't anyone talk about anything else then my type. this forum dissapoints me with the day...

First of all, I was talking about AN ENCOUNTER I had, this was an event which stood out against the other experiences I've had with my duals.

And now I'm very curious how you would objectively speak about an SEE, cause I'm not convinced that I didn't do that.

Yes the best part about a dual is the feeling they give you. So I'll concentrate on that part. I've never said my feelings are mostly negative towards them (where dit I quote that??), it was just AN ENCOUNTER.

And that I don't talk like an ILI means I'm not an ILI? My english just isn't sophistaced enough to use all those imaginative words. At least nobody ever doubted my so I guess this proves your lack of insight and naiveness with typing people. Amusing.

[reyn_til_runa]

Yes the best part about a dual is the feeling they give you. So I'll concentrate on that part. I've never said my feelings are mostly negative towards them (where dit I quote that??), it was just AN ENCOUNTER.

Once again I had a negative encouter with an SEE. I think all SEE have these negative traits more or less in them.

i'm sorry, i thought these words suggested a negative, recurring experience.

oh boy can't anyone talk about anything else then my type. this forum dissapoints me with the day...

well, to be fair, this is the first time i've ever commented on your type. and i'm pretty sure there are other conversations going on.

First of all, I was talking about AN ENCOUNTER I had, this was an event which stood out against the other experiences I've had with my duals.

this was not clear

And now I'm very curious how you would objectively speak about an SEE, cause I'm not convinced that I didn't do that.

i don't think i would objectively speak about an SEE. it's impossible. i can make observations however. like this SEE did *, another SEE appeared to being doing ^, but i cannot say that, objectively speaking, SEEs bring joy, fun, and atmosphere. objective statements are based on facts, not personal opinions based on your feelings (contradictory) about a few experiences.

And that I don't talk like an ILI means I'm not an ILI? My english just isn't sophistaced enough to use all those imaginative words. At least nobody ever doubted my so I guess this proves how your typing skills are. Pretty shitty and narrowminded.

i never said anything about your English or your use of imaginative words. and this makes no sense: so, because nobody ever doubted YOUR Ni, there is something proven about MY typing skills? i have no idea how this is shitty and narrowminded. i am trying to be helpful, but i can see you'd rather be told lies.

[Jarno]

First of all, I was talking about AN ENCOUNTER I had, this was an event which stood out against the other experiences I've had with my duals.

this was not clear

fair enough.


I do think you can objectively speak, when they majority would describe an SEE like that. The part about the feeling however was subjectively, I pointed that out, by beginning the sentence with "in my view". I hope we don't disagree on that.

I don't need help with my type, I'm 100% certain of mine. People who think I'm not Ni or not Te should rather take my advice and learn that an ILI can behave like me. Lot's of people don't doubt my type. But the nicest thing of all is that people don't seem to know the power of relationships to find out your type. Otherwise they would be a lot more careful taking other people's type in doubt. Sorry for my somewhat cruel reaction, but my goal on this forum is to learn things about socionics, I'm not here to find out my type. It sometimes looks like people are trying to teach me the alfabet, like I don't know it already. Just annoying and useless.

[Jarno]

Once again I had a negative encouter with an SEE. I think all SEE have these negative traits more or less in them.

It seems to me that they don't care about people themselves, but only care about the fun that people can support them with.
If they can't derive any pleasure from you or if they have someone else for their pleasure, you are considered to be a burden and will be dumped.
Which costs them no effort at all.

They are also great at turning things around. They want to do something or go somewhere, and tell you, we'll go there or do that, because you'll like it. As if they do it all for you, while it's just in favor of them.

To summarize, they are loyal as long as they have a need for you, don't truly care about people, and make themselves popular in a hypocritical way.

if you were to take away the SEEs in this post and replace it with ILIs the entire thing would still be applicable.
IME with ILIs, if you can't hold their attention 100% of the time you are with them, they bounce or have "wandering eyes." You guys wonder why ESFps tend to be superficial, only interested in fun... it's because you need us that way!

BTW, i have known several ILIs to have dumped others because they were considered a burden.

The last sentence can also be applied to ILIs too.

I could say more but I'll save it for the next post.

Ah interesting. I do see your point. But the main difference is, IMO, that when an SEE behaves like this, it creates a bigger shock (at least to me), because you don't expect it from the people caring and loving SEE.

But I agree that ILI's can behave like you say.
But the shock is probably lesser, because they are already known as dreamy, and not care about people.

[Phaedrus]

I don't need help with my type, I'm 100% certain of mine. People who think I'm not Ni or not Te should rather take my advice and learn that an ILI can behave like me. Lot's of people don't doubt my type. But the nicest thing of all is that people don't seem to know the power of relationships to find out your type. Otherwise they would be a lot more careful taking other people's type in doubt. Sorry for my somewhat cruel reaction, but my goal on this forum is to learn things about socionics, I'm not here to find out my type. It sometimes looks like people are trying to teach me the alfabet, like I don't know it already. Just annoying and useless.

It's like reading one of my own posts or an printed version of my own thoughts ... Do I have two accounts on this forum? Is Phaedrus and Jarno the same entity ...? Or is it just me having read too much philosophy recently ...?

By the way, I have no reason to doubt that both of you, Jarno and reyn_til_runa are the same type. I understood perfectly what Jarno was trying to say in his first post in this thread, and just because you misunderstood him, reyn, it is too drastic to start questioning someone's type because of a slight misunderstanding.

[Joy]

Anytime anyone says that SEE's don't truly care about people, it sounds an alarm in my head, especially if they try to say it's true of all SEE's to one extent or another. (Some of the most fiercely loyal people I've known have been SEE's.)

[XoX]

Anytime anyone says that SEE's don't truly care about people, it sounds an alarm in my head, especially if they try to say it's true of all SEE's to one extend or another. (Some of the most fiercely loyal people I've known have been SEE's.)

They just manipulated you to believe they were loyal. They are such politicians. Hah.

[XoX]

BTW, i have known several ILIs to have dumped others because they were considered a burden.

The last sentence can also be applied to ILIs too.

I could say more but I'll save it for the next post.

Ah interesting. I do see your point. But the main difference is, IMO, that when an SEE behaves like this, it creates a bigger shock (at least to me), because you don't expect it from the people caring and loving SEE.

But I agree that ILI's can behave like you say.
But the shock is probably lesser, because they are already known as dreamy, and not care about people.

Yeah. ILIs don't dump anyone because technically they didn't relate to these people in the first place. They just didn't have the energy to tell them to go away and that might have given the impression that the ILI was bonding with them. Hah. With SEEs it is different. They manipulate you to like them by perceiving what you want to hear and then saying that. It is hard to perceive them doing this to you (because they are skilled at making you feel good) but it is easy to spot when you see them doing this to others.

[Joy]

Anytime anyone says that SEE's don't truly care about people, it sounds an alarm in my head, especially if they try to say it's true of all SEE's to one extend or another. (Some of the most fiercely loyal people I've known have been SEE's.)

They just manipulated you to believe they were loyal. They are such politicians. Hah.

They just have different "levels" on which they can care about people... Someone could misunderstand their friendliness and think that they're closer than they are if they're believing what they want to believe. This hasn't been a problem for me probably because I pretty much always allow the other person to decide how close a friendship is.

SEE's can appear to have done so at times due to short attention spans, but they still care about you even if you don't have their undivided attention. If you were ever their friend and there wasn't anything that got in between you, chances are they'll still see you as a friend even if you haven't seen you for years.

Also, if someone treats a person they care about poorly, they'll go on the offensive and fight for that person, in the very least criticizing the person who's treating their friend poorly. I've seen them do this for people who aren't their friends as well. (But don't get me wrong, they can be the ones treating people poorly, too.)

[Jarno]

Also, if someone treats a person they care about poorly, they'll go on the offensive and fight for that person, in the very least criticizing the person who's treating their friend poorly. I've seen them do this for people who aren't their friends as well.

Yes I've seen this too once. Nice to hear it could be a common trait.

[XoX]

Anytime anyone says that SEE's don't truly care about people, it sounds an alarm in my head, especially if they try to say it's true of all SEE's to one extend or another. (Some of the most fiercely loyal people I've known have been SEE's.)

They just manipulated you to believe they were loyal. They are such politicians. Hah.

They just have different "levels" on which they can care about people... Someone could misunderstand their friendliness and think that they're closer than they are if they're believing what they want to believe. This hasn't been a problem for me probably because I pretty much always allow the other person to decide how close a friendship is.

Well, I don't know about these levels. Never known a SEE that well I guess. My problem is more about their inconsistency. That you hear them say the things you want to hear at one moment. Then you are like "hey, that's cool". But then you hear them saying other things to the person next to you (and it often contradicts what they said to you). Then you (=I) conclude that their words mean nothing and that they just manipulate you to like them. I'm not trying to sound too negative btw Just I have problems trusting something a SEE says. One on one they can often fool me but in a group setting their evil plans become obvious because they start contradicting themselves I don't doubt that they can love someone deeply and get attached (I have seen how they can hang to their ex-people long after the relationship has ended and try to reel them back). Just something about their casual "politician behavior" makes me wary.

[Expat]

My problem is more about their inconsistency. That you hear them say the things you want to hear at one moment. Then you are like "hey, that's cool". But then you hear them saying other things to the person next to you (and it often contradicts what they said to you).

What kind of things?

[XoX]

Edited in order to not sound too negative

[Jarno]

Then you (=I) conclude that their words mean nothing and that they just manipulate you to like them.

I'm not trying to sound too negative btw Just I have problems trusting something a SEE says.

I don't doubt that they can love someone deeply and get attached (I have seen how they can hang to their ex-people long after the relationship has ended and try to reel them back). Just something about their casual "politician behavior" makes me wary.

I totally agree. I recognize those things.

[liveandletlive]

perhaps you all have just had negative encounters with ESFp-Se. i consider myself extremely loyal to a fault sometimes.

[BLauritson]

I'm yet to meet a disloyal SEE =/

[Expat]

I don't need help with my type, I'm 100% certain of mine.

Asking questions about your (anyone's) type, even questioning the type itself, can have many other motivations besides "helping" or "attacking" you, you know. A discussion about someone's type helps to discuss socionics concepts; it's not necessarily about the person as such.

Otherwise they would be a lot more careful taking other people's type in doubt.

Why is that a subject people should be "careful" about at all? So people doubt your type and they are wrong. Why is that a problem?

Sorry for my somewhat cruel reaction, but my goal on this forum is to learn things about socionics, I'm not here to find out my type. It sometimes looks like people are trying to teach me the alfabet, like I don't know it already. Just annoying and useless.

I find that a bizarre reaction - not "cruel" at all.

[Jarno]

Sorry for my somewhat cruel reaction, but my goal on this forum is to learn things about socionics, I'm not here to find out my type. It sometimes looks like people are trying to teach me the alfabet, like I don't know it already. Just annoying and useless.

I find that a bizarre reaction - not "cruel" at all.[/quote]

I was referring to my former reaction (about her typing skills). Not what's written here.

[Gilly]

This thread is very revealing.

[XoX]

perhaps you all have just had negative encounters with ESFp-Se. i consider myself extremely loyal to a fault sometimes.

I didn't say I don't like SEEs. I just like to criticize.

[Expat]

This thread is very revealing.

Isn't it?

[crazedrat]

So which are the positive qualities that would compensate for those negative ones, in your view?

Objectively speaking, they bring joy, fun and atmosphere.

In my view speaking (it seems like a covert attack on my type b.t.w. ...sigh...): Since it is my dual, I've been mostly counscious to the feelings that I get from them, like feeling total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone who I know very well. The things they say hit a spot, so to say. They surprise me again and again. You instantly get happy when being in their company.

uhm, generally a statement such as "they bring joy, fun, and atmsphere" cannot be objectively spoken.
so i see what you've done -- come up with a reason that this totally subjective experience could possibly be objectified. you try adequatlely, to your credit, but come on jarno. let me get this straight, you are "mostly" conscious of the feelings you get from them...total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone I know very well. the things they say hit a spot, so to say. they surprise me again and again. you get happy when being in their company." AND your feelings are mostly negative towards them? BIGGER AND "they bring joy, fun, and atmosphere" is considered an objective statement. i don't speak like this. i know you say this is not a discussion about your type, but either i am not ILI or you are not. you are far too subjective without seeming imaginative. in other words, you seem to think these experiences you quote actually ARE objectifiable.

You are not ILI, you are LII. LIIs do not understand a few things about the way ILIs speak. They are constantly badgering ILI with posts like this. They take it as their personal crusade to correct ILI at every chance they get, on their language. Threads are constantly hijacked.
Here is why they are stupid for this
1: ILIs speak toward their subjective impressions, and organizing them in a logical way
2: ILIs use context to clarify a words meaning. ILI says 1, 1b, 1c, 1bc, 1bcb, etc... LII says 1, 2, 3, 4
3: to the extent a person can relate to an ILIs subjective impressions, they can interpret the ILIs language. The subjective impression is the comprehension of the idea in its entirety. 1b can't be interpreted without an understanding of 1, 1bc requires an understanding of 1, 1b, 1c, etc.
4: the interpretation of language is always subjective
5: LIIs hold to the ideal language is objectifiable
6: An objective idealistic interpretation of language creates a tendency toward linguistic confusion. LII sees 1b, 1c, 1d, and thinks "1, 2, 3"
7: this tendency LIIs have causes many word confusions. Philosophy is a big LII word confusion.. sometimes psychology also.
Example: homosexuality is a chemical interaction in the brain. Homosexuality is a sin. Homosexuality is a mental disorder. Homosexuality is a product of certain social developmental patterns. Homosexuality is a sexual fixation. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuality is not a mental disorder.
LII cannot reconcile the language game, ILI can. LII will think the statements contradict one another, ILI can see them side by side. All because language is subjective.
ILI creates the purest form of language. Stop being a fly.
This goes for all LIIs; and actually, all alpha

[FDG]

Let's just make a new type where we place both ILIs and LIIs and leave them without duals, ok?

[reyn_til_runa]

So which are the positive qualities that would compensate for those negative ones, in your view?

Objectively speaking, they bring joy, fun and atmosphere.

In my view speaking (it seems like a covert attack on my type b.t.w. ...sigh...): Since it is my dual, I've been mostly counscious to the feelings that I get from them, like feeling total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone who I know very well. The things they say hit a spot, so to say. They surprise me again and again. You instantly get happy when being in their company.

uhm, generally a statement such as "they bring joy, fun, and atmsphere" cannot be objectively spoken.
so i see what you've done -- come up with a reason that this totally subjective experience could possibly be objectified. you try adequatlely, to your credit, but come on jarno. let me get this straight, you are "mostly" conscious of the feelings you get from them...total comfort, complete trust, a buddy, someone I know very well. the things they say hit a spot, so to say. they surprise me again and again. you get happy when being in their company." AND your feelings are mostly negative towards them? BIGGER AND "they bring joy, fun, and atmosphere" is considered an objective statement. i don't speak like this. i know you say this is not a discussion about your type, but either i am not ILI or you are not. you are far too subjective without seeming imaginative. in other words, you seem to think these experiences you quote actually ARE objectifiable.

You are not ILI, you are LII. LIIs do not understand a few things about the way ILIs speak. They are constantly badgering ILI with posts like this. They take it as their personal crusade to correct ILI at every chance they get, on their language. Threads are constantly hijacked.
Here is why they are stupid for this
1: ILIs speak toward their subjective impressions, and organizing them in a logical way
2: ILIs use context to clarify a words meaning. ILI says 1, 1b, 1c, 1bc, 1bcb, etc... LII says 1, 2, 3, 4
3: to the extent a person can relate to an ILIs subjective impressions, they can interpret the ILIs language. The subjective impression is the comprehension of the idea in its entirety. 1b can't be interpreted without an understanding of 1, 1bc requires an understanding of 1, 1b, 1c, etc.
4: the interpretation of language is always subjective
5: LIIs hold to the ideal language is objectifiable
6: An objective idealistic interpretation of language creates a tendency toward linguistic confusion. LII sees 1b, 1c, 1d, and thinks "1, 2, 3"
7: this tendency LIIs have causes many word confusions. Philosophy is a big LII word confusion.. sometimes psychology also.
Example: homosexuality is a chemical interaction in the brain. Homosexuality is a sin. Homosexuality is a mental disorder. Homosexuality is a product of certain social developmental patterns. Homosexuality is a sexual fixation. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexuality is not a mental disorder.
LII cannot reconcile the language game, ILI can. LII will think the statements contradict one another, ILI can see them side by side. All because language is subjective.
ILI creates the purest form of language. Stop being a fly.
This goes for all LIIs; and actually, all alpha

actually i wasn't honing in on any language confusion, but more on why jarno would state that something clearly subjective is objective.

since this thread is about SEE, i won't respond to your reasons why i am LII (and your opinions re: how to differentiate between ILI/LII when it comes to use of language/logic), but i'm not persuaded.

[Expat]

FWIW, I do think reyn_til_runa is ILI, and that crazedrat's argument made almost no sense.

[liveandletlive]

ok so one thing i've been thinking about a lot since this thread has been started is SEEs and disloyalty. i obviously can't speak for all the SEEs out there, but my interpretation of our perceived disloyalty has to do with our . Once we've conquered somebody as our friend with our , IME i've never just ditched them, but i do spend considerably less time on them as i view our relationship as already established and we moved from the aquaintance level to the friends level. I don't think this is abnormal, in fact i think this is the case for most people IMO. I've never used my friends or any of the other things that you guys have experienced with other SEEs, but in my life, this is the reason for my possibly perceived disloyalty.