Following in redbaron's footsteps :p

[Sirena]

VI this couple, please!

[Crispy]

Idk about VI, but in the pic with the grey shirt, I saw Adam Sandler in the guys smile.

[munenori2]

Reminds me of a calmer version of a guy I think was ExTj.

[Rubicon]

IEE-SLI?

[munenori2]

I think that works.

[Krig the Viking]

I think that works.

I was thinking EII-SLI, but IEE-SLI wouldn't surprise me either. Her body language seems relatively withdrawn, and her facial expressions don't project much Fe, other than in the first picture, which in my mind would fit Ignoring Fe better than Demonstrative Fe.

Mind you, standing next to the SLI, she looks positively exuberant and outgoing by comparison.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

That guy reminds me of a guy I dated. And I kinda resemble the chick. So I can see how that mesh up is compatible. (I liked him a lot we might get back together in the future. Possibly)

[strrrng]

the guy is LSE. I remember him from last year.

[Sirena]

Thanks to all who've posted so far!

So right now the majority rule is ST for the guy, NF for the girl, Delta>Beta.

Keep the opinions coming! About TYPE, that is...Ashton.

[Sirena]

Idk about VI, but in the pic with the grey shirt, I saw Adam Sandler in the guys smile.

That guy reminds me of a guy I dated. And I kinda resemble the chick. So I can see how that mesh up is compatible. (I liked him a lot we might get back together in the future. Possibly)

Any idea on your guy's type?

He looks a little slow.

Takes one to know one.

the guy is LSE. I remember him from last year.

And the girl?

[strrrng]

I would say "the girl" VIs Fi-IEE, not ruling out the possibility of EII.

[Sirena]

I would say "the girl" VIs Fi-IEE, not ruling out the possibility of EII.

lol You're consistent, I like that. Thanks for VI-ing "the girl".

[strrrng]

you guys just seem like a delta couple overall, to me.

[Sirena]

you guys just seem like a delta couple overall, to me.

You could be right about that, I still don't know. But there is NO WAY IN HELL he is LSE. THAT much I know.

[strrrng]

well, he doesn't seem especially IP.

[Sirena]

well, he doesn't seem especially IP.

You'd be surprised, based on temperament definitions he would be IP>IJ>EP>EJ.

All temperament definitions have me pegged as IP too though, even more so than him.

[Galen]

Girl seems ENFj, not really sure about the guy although ESTj would really shock me if he was

[munenori2]

Girl seems ENFj, not really sure about the guy although ESTj would really shock me if he was

Give us something more definitive! WE NEED ANSWERS!!!

[Lobo]

my twin sister has found love I see...

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Sirena]

Give us something more definitive! WE NEED ANSWERS!!!

Exactly, geez! Thank you!

my twin sister has found love I see...

The guy reminds me of people I knew of these types:
- SLE
- SEI
- LSE

Overall I'd say SLE (especially in the 5th picture), he's also large like virtually all SLEs I know, what I can be certain of is that he's Sensing.

Edit: Sirena, the last time I typed you IEE, as far as I remember, but currently I can't tell. But I'd not exclude Fe now, not at all actually .

Did you? Hmmm, interesting. But back on topic, what about the girl in the pics???

[Blaze]

i didn't read what anybody else wrote.

the girl. IEI.

the guy: EIE.

still lookin good sirena! :-)

[Sirena]

i didn't read what anybody else wrote.

the girl. IEI.

the guy: EIE.

still lookin good sirena! :-)

awww thanks!

Yeah, sorry lol. I meant he looks > valuing.

Delta ST of some kind probably, leaning towards ESTj. He's got that latent doe eye thing going on that EXTjs seem to get in their unguarded moments lol. The Beta STs don't have that.

You seem like a stable couple, congrats.

Yep, he's the best, and we're the best together . If this isn't duality, I don't know what is. But really, it wouldn't matter at all, since that wouldn't change a thing. He's still definitely NOT ESTj though, sorry.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Sirena]

why not estj? I think he's delta ST.
She: enfp-fi.

He just doesn't fit the profile of an ESTj...at all. I could maybe buy ISTp, but not ESTj. It's just not within the realm of possibility. I should probably try to go into more detail than this, but at this point I don't know how I can go about describing this impression. It'll just turn into stupid oversimplifications that don't do it justice. Basically, my idea of Te leading and Si creative don't fit with how he is.

Sirena, does your boyfriend like to argue with people and bet for different things. Does he quickly note what are people capable and not capable of doing, being relatively vocal about it? (I'm not talking about labeling people as "incompetent", but simply certain people for certain tasks).

No, that doesn't describe him at all.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Sirena]

Ok, so I think Delta ST > Beta ST.

Don't you think that's a big, stupid stereotype? Plus, that sounds ESTj to me even more so than Beta ST.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Sirena]

so describe them for us?

I already stated that I don't think I can do that without making them sound like a cartoon. I wouldn't even know where to start.

In absolute terms, yes. But the way you said, it appears that he is not even close to this, which - in my experience - is applicable to Beta STs - capabilities/lack of capabilities for SLE; competence/incompetence for LSI. I don't think that he's LSI, though. As long as he doesn't deal at all with the value of things or people, I have no idea how could he be an Beta ST, or even an Se type in general.

But that's not what I said. Basically, my response was a reaction to the aggression label that you, like many others, add to anything "Beta". All such descriptions all seem to have that embedded tone to them and it irritates me. Betas=assholes. Personally, I think some people conveniently use this to try to justify their antisocial behavior. So, that's what I responded to.

I never said that he doesn't deal with the value of things or people. He does, but he's not an aggressive, argumentative jerk about it.

And no, that's not LSE but rather SLE (just my opinion, if you prefer). I think you're biased and deny what might consider you not closed to a "perfect couple", is this maybe why you rejected those traits as LSE?
---

Concluding, from VI only I'd say Beta ST for him; from posts (but no problem with VI) I'd say you're Fe Rational - EIE or ESE. When you want something, not even hell can stop you .

Having said the above...no, I'm not counting on him being Beta or Delta. I don't see one as better than the other. Hell, I don't even know my own type and for all I know any of the 4 NFs are possible for me. We have been in a very close relationship for over a year now and it only gets better, so I already consider us a "perfect couple". There's nothing missing that I'm trying to figure out from this. It's even funny to me that you would say that, because if he were an ESTj, then ESTj's are the most awesome type in the world! I just don't think ESTj deserves that kind of credit, lol.

Oh, and ESE is also an IMPOSSIBLE type for me.

What do you mean by "when I want something, nothing can stop me"? I'm honestly curious because I'd like to elaborate on that, as I find that to be true in some ways, though not in others.

[Krig the Viking]

But that's not what I said. Basically, my response was a reaction to the aggression label that you, like many others, add to anything "Beta". All such descriptions all seem to have that embedded tone to them and it irritates me. Betas=assholes. Personally, I think some people conveniently use this to try to justify their antisocial behavior. So, that's what I responded to.

I never said that he doesn't deal with the value of things or people. He does, but he's not an aggressive, argumentative jerk about it.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't see any implications of "Betas=assholes" in Pinocchio's posts in this thread. The worst thing he implied was that SLEs like to argue, but that's not the same as being an asshole. Pinocchio's description seemed pretty accurate and neutral to me.

[Sirena]

Maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't see any implications of "Betas=assholes" in Pinocchio's posts in this thread. The worst thing he implied was that SLEs like to argue, but that's not the same as being an asshole. Pinocchio's description seemed pretty accurate and neutral to me.

Really? Because it seems to me that saying that someone's way of achieving something, like "evaluating people" (for instance) is by arguing and aggressively poking at people is a way to color this stereotype. If anything, this seems to me like a description of someone that doesn't have very good control over their surroundings. Seems pretty counter-intuitive. Is it not possible for Beta ST's to be nice, chill people who know when and when not to react because of their strong Se, instead of insecure assholes that go around starting trouble? The kind of reasoning that says this is even type-related and moreover related to Se ego, is so stupid to me.

[Sirena]

In absolute terms, yes. But the way you said, it appears that he is not even close to this, which - in my experience - is applicable to Beta STs - capabilities/lack of capabilities for SLE; competence/incompetence for LSI. I don't think that he's LSI, though. As long as he doesn't deal at all with the value of things or people, I have no idea how could he be an Beta ST, or even an Se type in general.

Ok, now that I'm over my little outburst lol, I'd like to know how you would contrast this with Delta STs. I'd like to compare the equivalent of this in Delta STs so I can see if it's a better fit.

Thanks!

[somavision]

I'm inclined to go towards

LSE - Him
EII or IEE - Her

What types are they?

[strrrng]

Really? Because it seems to me that saying that someone's way of achieving something, like "evaluating people" (for instance) is by arguing and aggressively poking at people is a way to color this stereotype.

to me, it just seemed like he was pointing to the tendency of beta STs to quickly and adeptly size up someone's capability, with regard to a given task, and be direct about what they should do. it's actually this trait that aids beta NFs (more so IEIs), as they tend to be somewhat uncertain about their position/value on a concrete level, and need very simple, clear indicators to better focus their typically wavering energies.

If anything, this seems to me like a description of someone that doesn't have very good control over their surroundings.

not necessarily. I would contrast it to delta STs (more so LSEs), who don't pinpoint the effect of objects (aka people) as well, but rather maintain a consistent upkeep on concrete action. this can lead to overlooking more basic assessments of people in favor of what kind of "productive work" they can do within a given setting.

Seems pretty counter-intuitive. Is it not possible for Beta ST's to be nice, chill people who know when and when not to react because of their strong Se, instead of insecure assholes that go around starting trouble? The kind of reasoning that says this is even type-related and moreover related to Se ego, is so stupid to me.

yes, it is possible, and nothing in his post suggested otherwise. every type has its virtues and vices.

Yeah, sorry lol. I meant he looks > valuing.

[Aiss]

The woman reminds me of EII I know. I could see SLI for the guy, though any introverted thinker would do.

[Krig the Viking]

to me, it just seemed like he was pointing to the tendency of beta STs to quickly and adeptly size up someone's capability, with regard to a given task, and be direct about what they should do. it's actually this trait that aids beta NFs (more so IEIs), as they tend to be somewhat uncertain about their position/value on a concrete level, and need very simple, clear indicators to better focus their typically wavering energies.

Exactly, this is the impression I got as well.

[Creepy-Cyclops]

Sirena, does your boyfriend like to argue with people and bet for different things. Does he quickly note what are people capable and not capable of doing, being relatively vocal about it? (I'm not talking about labeling people as "incompetent", but simply certain people for certain tasks).

IME anyone can be like this. I accept that Beta STs can be more like this, but what if we meet another type who does this. Some other type might have a focus on their Se, other beta STs a focus on their Ti, or something not socionic related.

Which is the problem with these types of posts. People are often too complex to have these binary definitions.

I can see your question relating to the functions, however these boxing in complicates behavior with psychological underpinnings, ie their type. I don't know what the right questions should be: I think it is best not to ask these questions at all, which means we can't type over the internet without exceptional difficulty, so this method of dialogue is a waste of time. And the proof is in the unresolved typing threads and the varying people we meet.

Edit: A bigger question, and not just to you: isn't socionics over the internet therefore simply a mental masturbation?

[Sirena]

are you always so defensive?

Are you always so bad at reading people? I wasn't being defensive, just answering your comment.

to me, it just seemed like he was pointing to the tendency of beta STs to quickly and adeptly size up someone's capability, with regard to a given task, and be direct about what they should do. it's actually this trait that aids beta NFs (more so IEIs), as they tend to be somewhat uncertain about their position/value on a concrete level, and need very simple, clear indicators to better focus their typically wavering energies.

As I said, he does this, just not "argumentatively or aggressively", which is what I had a problem with. He's more charismatic than pushy.

not necessarily. I would contrast it to delta STs (more so LSEs), who don't pinpoint the effect of objects (aka people) as well, but rather maintain a consistent upkeep on concrete action. this can lead to overlooking more basic assessments of people in favor of what kind of "productive work" they can do within a given setting.

Honestly, the above fits him much better than this.[/QUOTE]

[Creepy-Cyclops]

@sirena, I think the woman looks IEE, I am much less confident of the males type, so I won't guess. Maybe i'll become more sure at a later date.

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request