JohnDo

[JohnDo]

Read this thread and vote...

I voted for myself:
- knowledge: good (maybe excellent in the future but some certainly know more...)
- trustworthiness: good (some will disagree - in my opinion I was banned for different reasons once)
- creativity: excellent (at least I try to participate and my ideas often work)

Everyone who as a thread like this one is allowed to vote.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

You're one of the people I tune out, you're ideas don't make sense to me.

[Jarno]

knowledge Good. You say sane things
trustworthy, I didn't know what this exactly meant, but I've seen (only a couple) strange typings from you so Okay.
Creativity, also Okay I guess.

I don't know to that much about you, so my choices could change in the future...

[JohnDo]

Trustworthiness means someone participates seriously. Stupid remarks without reference to socionics (like maybe Absurd, Archon), bad explanations and missing arguments (like maybe tcaud, maritsa), verbal attacks that indicate psychological instability (like maybe Gilly, tcaud, Archon) would maybe mean that trustworthines is certainly not "excellent" and probably not "good" but only "okay" maybe...

I expect most people here to be "good" or "okay" in all categories. Some people like Rick would certainly be "excellent" in knowledge. Someone who offers a lot of unusual insight or ideas (like maybe tcaud, Gilly, Krig) would certainly get an "excellent" in creativity...

Some users with "good" or "excellent" trustworthiness who rather analyze (like maybe Jarno or labcoat) would probably be "okay" in creativity. More ideas wanted...

You're one of the people I tune out, you're ideas don't make sense to me.

This is self-contradictory.
1.) You tune out? Wrong, you answered in this thread.
2.) My ideas don't make sense? The concept of this thread actually is one of my ideas to improve the forum. If it doesn't majke sense to you - why do you participate?

btw: Just open your own thread with a poll.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

This is self-contradictory.
1.) You tune out? Wrong, you answered in this thread.
2.) My ideas don't make sense? The concept of this thread actually is one of my ideas to improve the forum. If it doesn't majke sense to you - why do you participate?

btw: Just open your own thread with a poll.

Say, you seem to have enjoyed/see yourself good at dissecting my post right up to the point where it doesn't make sense anymore, maybe you could start with the letters in it next.

[JohnDo]

You are certainly one of the people who would be "weak" or at best "okay" in trustworthiness. You have to justify your arguments if you want me to understand what you mean!

1.) Which ideas are you referring to?!
2.) Why don't they make sense to you?

That's what I mean with "trustworthiness"... Arguments without justifying and explaining would result in a bad rating...

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Well, we already know that you think Te is evil, so it's only normal that you'd lump my assessment into being untrustworthy by your definition - assuming - reasonably so - that you'd prefer a Ti explanation with a self contained systematic theory incorporated in the post.

You are certainly one of the people who would be "weak" or at best "okay" in trustworthiness. You have to justify your arguments if you want me to understand what you mean!

1.) Which ideas are you referring to?!
2.) Why don't they make sense to you?

That's what I mean with "trustworthiness"... Arguments without justifying and explaining would result in a bad rating...

People aren't under any obligation to provide a reason for their opinion if they don't feel like it, however, i've seen plenty of people that supply reasons that still don't make sense, so they maybe shouldn't have bothered.

In regards to yourself, I don't see the correlation to DCNH and to facial types, you do, but to me that's purely subjective and you can't convince anyone of it. I suppose I could come up with a correlation between thumb size and type, it wouldn't matter if anyone else agreed with it, as it would probably mean that I move up the ranking system - that only a handful of people who think they are an authority would really be interested in.

I suggest - and this is an honest suggestion - that you, tcaud, whoever else thinks it's worthwhile - that you devise your own ranking system and you can place your own ranking either in your signature or underneath your avatar, I suppose that way the people who think it's important can compare the people who partake in it with themselves. You can then debate with each other how many points you've won or lost each week. Simple. Go for it.

[Microknight]

Knowledge: Good
You seem to know your stuff, Socionics and otherwise.

Trustworthiness: Excellent
Generally, I think you are well meaning. Sometimes I think you are too quick to dismiss the ideas of others, but I think this is a problem generally experienced by Ni-LIIs anyway. Ni-LIIs usually have well thought out ideas, and often assume that others haven't thought their ideas through(which is usually the case, but not always). You are an honest poster, I think.

Creativity: Good
Your DCNH VI ideas are interesting, and you bring some original ideas to the table.

Some people might not like you, but overall I have a positive impression.

[Absurd]

Trustworthiness means someone participates seriously. Stupid remarks without reference to socionics (like maybe Absurd)

So, we're officially married, John. Glad to hear it

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GFq6usPg6U"]YouTube- al bundy - psycho dad[/ame]

[somavision]

I do not share you interest in subtypes or VI. Your posts are of little relevance to me and your focus detracts from what I take from Socionics. However that is not a judgement on the depth of your knowledge or the overall relevance of your ideas, they're just are not important to me.

[JohnDo]

Well, we already know that you think Te is evil, so it's only normal that you'd lump my assessment into being untrustworthy by your definition

I never said Te is evil.

People aren't under any obligation to provide a reason for their opinion if they don't feel like it

Opinions without arguments I consider useless - just because nobody will be able to understand the opinion...

In regards to yourself, I don't see the correlation to DCNH and to facial types, you do, but to me that's purely subjective and you can't convince anyone of it.

Of course I can. Some people already realize that it might actually work. But it will certainly take some time until it is an acknowledged typing method...

I suppose I could come up with a correlation between thumb size and type, it wouldn't matter if anyone else agreed with it, as it would probably mean that I move up the ranking system - that only a handful of people who think they are an authority would really be interested in.

Of course there is a correlation between thumb size and type. Sensory people often have bigger thumbs than intuitors. But it is not a reliable typing method I think.

I suggest - and this is an honest suggestion - that you, tcaud, whoever else thinks it's worthwhile - that you devise your own ranking system and you can place your own ranking either in your signature or underneath your avatar, I suppose that way the people who think it's important can compare the people who partake in it with themselves. You can then debate with each other how many points you've won or lost each week. Simple. Go for it.

You completely failed to understand my idea.

[Absurd]

And there he is, ignoring me for nth time. Sorry for any foul language now, but it is unavoidable.

If you're ignoring me, you little shite, make it public, like crazie rat did, or fakk off. Merry Christmas!

[Absurd]

Wait a minute, is this some kind of joke ?

EDIT: I'm beginning to really dislike you INTjs.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

I never said Te is evil.

Well, I don't have a photographic memory, but I remember you were saying something along those lines. I did a quick search of your posts and brought up this:

I disagree.

ENTjs ignore (truth and justice).
I don't like talking to them because they are robber barons.

INTps ignore (ideas and adventures).
I don't like talking to them because they are party poopers.

No offence meant!
I'm just using to tell the truth and to make fun.

No, that's not what I meant.
But I am of the opinion that capitalists should not be allowed to take part in any political decisions because they don't value truth and justice ().

Both Logical and Intuitive LIIs value truth and justice, of course.

Intuitive LIIs make more use of and whereas Logical LIIs make more use of and .

So your -function is stronger than mine. That's why you are a capitalist.
is LII's ignoring function but Logical LIIs don't completely ignore it. OK?


Azeroffs as a LIE is "mostly against capitalism" though is his base function. This can only be explained by using subtypes. Harmonizing subtypes of any main type are interested in helping people. As capitalism kills millions of people (40.000.000 people die every year because they don't have enough food) harmonizing subtypes are normally against capitalism even if is their base function.

I couldn't be bothered searching for anything else, but you lop anyone with Te into an exclusion zone. Being the opposite of truth and justice, responsible for killing 40,000,000 each year - on the basis of a valued function. The representation you make happens to be what can easily be termed as "evil".

You completely failed to understand my idea.

Perhaps I do. Maybe that goes back to what I said in my initial post - I don't really understand you, or perhaps most of what you say (and usually disagree with the rest).

Sort of related to the other conversation we had, if you stopped rolling your eyes so much maybe i'd be inclined to at least try to grasp what you mean when you talk, but as it stands, given the nature of your unconventional posts and your attitude, I suppose I struggle to see why to devote the time to try as hard as maybe i'd have to. I'll try and read your posts some more, will see how it goes.

I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, but if you stopped rolling your eyes (and whistling so much) maybe you could also find an ability to explain yourself better rather than seemingly talk down in your posts, that might depend on how much you want to be understood more universally I suppose. (Can't believe i'm having to say that, however).

Good luck!

[buckland]

Wait a minute, is this some kind of joke ?

EDIT: I'm beginning to really dislike you INTjs.

He's not exactly a benchmark INTj. I don't think he is INTj at all, definitely an Fe quadra type, but unsure which one.

[JohnDo]

He's not exactly a benchmark INTj. I don't think he is INTj at all, definitely an Fe quadra type, but unsure which one.

Yeah, you're on the right track...

Ideologists ( ) are most always Alpha or Beta.
Opportunists ( ) are most always Gamma or Delta.

Ideologies with competetive character ( ) (national-socialism for example) are Beta.
Ideologies without competitive character ( ) (communism for example) are Alpha.

[buckland]

Yeah, you're on the right track...

Your perception of yourself as an ideologist is slightly misguided though. You do this to receive acclaim, it does not seem like you actually enjoy the actual process, creating ideas for their own sake. This is not that accurate either, as I don't necessarily think alpha NTs, which is what I'm assuming you're going for, do this in quite the way you're implying.

Plus, the number of ideas you throw out does not necessarily correlate with type. Tcaud and yourself especially have a rather misconstrued view of types based on this. The need to be considered intellectuals is distorting your understanding of socionics.

There's no doubt that in the back of e.g. alpha-NT's minds there is an element of glory-hunting etc, but with you it's a more visible/primary motive. It's the reason that your arguments are so littered with patronizing remarks.

Ideologists ( ) are most always Alpha ot Beta.
Opportunists ( ) are most always Gamma or Delta.

Ideologies with competetive character ( ) (national-socialism for example) are Beta.
Ideologies without competitive character ( ) (communism for example) are Alpha.

Here's the thing, it's just as easy to tag as ideologists and as opportunists.

[Absurd]

He's not exactly a benchmark INTj. I don't think he is INTj at all, definitely an Fe quadra type, but unsure which one.

Thank you!

[Skeptic]

Well, I don't have a photographic memory, but I remember you were saying something along those lines. I did a quick search of your posts and brought up this:



I couldn't be bothered searching for anything else, but you lop anyone with Te into an exclusion zone. Being the opposite of truth and justice, responsible for killing 40,000,000 each year - on the basis of a valued function. The representation you make happens to be what can easily be termed as "evil".

Perhaps I do. Maybe that goes back to what I said in my initial post - I don't really understand you, or perhaps most of what you say (and usually disagree with the rest).

Sort of related to the other conversation we had, if you stopped rolling your eyes so much maybe i'd be inclined to at least try to grasp what you mean when you talk, but as it stands, given the nature of your unconventional posts and your attitude, I suppose I struggle to see why to devote the time to try as hard as maybe i'd have to. I'll try and read your posts some more, will see how it goes.

I'm not an expert on this sort of thing, but if you stopped rolling your eyes (and whistling so much) maybe you could also find an ability to explain yourself better rather than seemingly talk down in your posts, that might depend on how much you want to be understood more universally I suppose. (Can't believe i'm having to say that, however).

Good luck!

I haven't got anything to say about the OP, but what John said in those posts this is the funniest thing I've read all week. Quick everyone, install leaders before kills us all!

[Absurd]

Your perception of yourself as an ideologist is slightly misguided though.

He or she is, living a dream, literally.

[JohnDo]

Your perception of yourself as an ideologist is slightly misguided though. You do this to receive acclaim, it does not seem like you actually enjoy the actual process, creating ideas for their own sake.

You are completely wrong. I create ideas (like my DCNH-VI method)
1.) because I like to theorize
2.) because I try to solve problems (like determining DCNH types)

Plus, the number of ideas you throw out does not necessarily correlate with type. Tcaud and yourself especially have a rather misconstrued view of types based on this. The need to be considered intellectuals is distorting your understanding of socionics.

You may be right about tcaud, he has a lot of strange ideas and in many cases he is the only one who understands them and believes in them without reason.
My DCNH-VI idea is not complicated, strange or crazy at all. I just typed many people and discovered an interesting pattern by using the hypothetical DCNH descriptions Krig and I had "developed". These hypothetical DCNH descriptions in combination with the VI pattern I discovered will help all people who are open-minded to increase their typing ability tremendously! I really can't see your problem there...

There's no doubt that in the back of e.g. alpha-NT's minds there is an element of glory-hunting etc, but with you it's a more visible/primary motive. It's the reason that your arguments are so littered with patronizing remarks.

INTj is the most self-confident type when it comes to theory. That's why INTjs may seem to be arrogant or patronizing in this area.
The holy idea of an INTj is truth, not glory-hunting. I theorize because I like to theorize - and to discover useful methods, patterns, facts.

to explore strange new worlds
to seek out new life and new civilizations
to boldly go where no man has gone before

Here's the thing, it's just as easy to tag as ideologists and as opportunists.

No, not at all. Here comes my next over-simplification:

Alpha and Beta - to help people and seek the truth (ideologists)
Gamma and Delta - to get along with people and look for profit (opportunists)

Alpha and Delta - to enjoy the moment and think about present possibilities
Beta and Gamma - to achive goals and think about future developments

Why should that be related to idology/opportunism?

[Skeptic]

Alpha and Beta - to help people and seek the truth (ideologists)
Gamma and Delta - to get along with people and look for profit (opportunists)

Alpha and Delta - to enjoy the moment and think about present possibilities
Beta and Gamma - to achive goals and think about future developments

Why should that be related to idology/opportunism?

You're making generalizations based on parts of functions. Before I accuse you of total heresy, I must ask; how often do you believe that your ideas about functions ring true? i.e. are capitalists and that are ideologists?

[JohnDo]

You're making generalizations based on parts of functions. Before I accuse you of total heresy, I must ask; how often do you believe that your ideas about functions ring true? i.e. are capitalists and that are ideologists?

That's not even an idea but rather a definition.

Te=Profit
Ti=Law,Logic

So what? Gulenko defines the information elements like that...

[Creepy-Cyclops]

That's not even an idea but rather a definition.

Te=Profit
Ti=Law,Logic

So what? Gulenko defines the information elements like that...

Alpha-centrism
An example of possible Alpha bias is that descriptions of Ne and Ti are often described in what seem to some people to be broader, more encompassing terms than the IM elements of Gamma, being the opposing quadra. For example Ti is sometimes described as related to the use of logic and understanding, as well as organization, whereas Te is often described enigmatically as related to "business logic" or random, disconnected facts.

......

Just as "health" does not equate exactly to Si , "theory" does not equate exactly to Ti , and people of different types may tend to generate theories of a slightly different nature.

So you can see that there could be more (or less) to the functions than what's been currently defined.

Gulenko using one word to sum up a function hardly does it justice don't you think? Considering that the 8 elements are supposed to encompass every form of perception and judging for the whole of humanity.

I haven't got anything to say about the OP, but what John said in those posts this is the funniest thing I've read all week. Quick everyone, install leaders before kills us all!

Indeed, it's silly.

There's plenty of examples where Te related things benefit society and humanity, and to think that a Te type isn't interested in truth and justice is to me almost like a socionic form of racism.

Yet, somehow he says he never called Te "evil", either I, or he, is confused in what he actually is saying, or he's not as "trustworthy" - in the actual sense of the word, than perhaps he thinks (or says....).

[ArchonAlarion]

You are able to cognate yourself as an object whilst simultaneously understanding your subjective position, so compared to most of life on this watery space-sphere, your knowledge is excellent!

I trust your woth. Excellent!

I say you have mucho bene creativity, because people with more self esteem tend to be more creative. ROCKIN!

[717495]

Well, even if Te is summed up as profit, and Ti as law, I would say that both are logic. (It can't be said that just because Te is logic, that Ti is somehow not as exceptional as being logic.) Which is the real logic, though? Oooh.

[Marie84]

Well, even if Te is summed up as profit, and Ti as law, I would say that both are logic. (It can't be said that just because Te is logic, that Ti is somehow not as exceptional as being logic.) Which is the real logic, though? Oooh.

Trying to classify the differences in logic, ethics, etc, in Socionics, is a rather shady area, since having a strength in one version means having it in the other, but to different degrees...

I rather see Te as practical logic and Ti as analytical logic

[Jarno]

I rather see Te as practical logic and Ti as analytical logic

yes it's probably better.

[Skeptic]

yes it's probably better.

But it kills people ()

[717495]

Te seems weird in ILIs though, like it doesn't get put to good use a lot or something. I guess that's the creative function for you, working in favor of the dominant. I think Te being practical will not always be true, especially in a creative sense for ILIs: its what is needed to understand theory. Factual information of Te often suggests practical information or a knowledge of practical application, but it is not within many common stereotypes of what is considered practical. Because who says that it needs to get done or be applied?