.
polikujm versus ashton, anndelise et al. thread [split from Divided's "My Type" thread]
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
polikujm versus anndelise et al. thread
Well your conception of the information elements is utterly just stupid, why people don't see already how you're obviously Fe-valuing with all your playful and immature dramatizing and taunting, and a lot of people here already think I'm ILI, including aiss. Maybe you should start twisting her mind a little more with your mutually insightful stories, or stare into her Ni-INTp eyes and she'll know exactly what you're thinking (because of VI)--I'm sure she'd enjoy that immensely. Thank you for your contribution.Originally Posted by Ashton
Shit, polikujm, you come off as a very good, what is it called, socionics specialist(?). Guy's "type me" thread went into oblivion, so may I ask you a question ? I may. You V.I ? type people by ......... ? Or do you rely on support as was mentioned by Ashton ?
No I don't like to VI because I think it doesn't help in the long run of anything. I basically think it proves to be a waste of time for people, why they chose to spend time on here confirming tons of first impressions about a few pictures instead of delving into an actual deep personality--beyond me. There's never been a correlation to most photos and personality. With very few photos available, you can kind of tell the general direction, but you still have to know the person themselves. I do like to get acquainted with people and make kind of slow gradual judgments about their character, and like to know a lot about them first, hopefully they will tell me about themselves with a description filled with facts and ideas, instead of talking a quick bit of information elements and scientific terms that are all relative to everything. It's most important to try to find out what their dominant function is, then you can get a better idea of if they're more inclined to x discussion or y discussion, x or y type of people, what their lifestyle is, essentially. The dominant function really reflects an essentially inherent lifestyle choice.
Second option. Alright.
You're aware that some people might not be willing to share their thoughts, goals, etc., with you, not liking you, being overtly private and so on.
You might get wrong signals at first, hell, all can.
EDIT: If you don't like to V.I - what's the point of it. Socionics wise ?
I just wanted to add that he also doesn't actually talk with the people he's typing. He doesn't ask them questions, doesn't ask them about their thoughts, ideas, goals, experiences, friends, 'enemies, lifestyle, etc. Yet he still is willing to tell them that he knows more about what's going on in their own minds and their own life than they do about themselves.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
What on earth are you talking about? Is this supposed to make me feel bad, because I have impressions about people? and because you remind me much more of other EIIs than IEEs. You clearly aren't really open to discussing it, or open to any opposing ideas other than your own, if you really think I'm pretending to know more about your life than you do. For heaven's sake.I just wanted to add that he also doesn't actually talk with the people he's typing. He doesn't ask them questions, doesn't ask them about their thoughts, ideas, goals, experiences, friends, 'enemies, lifestyle, etc. Yet he still is willing to tell them that he knows more about what's going on in their own minds and their own life than they do about themselves.
Game's over, polikujm.I just wanted to add that he also doesn't actually talk with the people he's typing. He doesn't ask them questions, doesn't ask them about their thoughts, ideas, goals, experiences, friends, 'enemies, lifestyle, etc. Yet he still is willing to tell them that he knows more about what's going on in their own minds and their own life than they do about themselves.
I better keep quiet, or, not that I don't want it, polikujm will type me, hmm, Emperor of the Cosmos.
polikujm versus anndelise et al. thread
I'm talking about you, and how you go about typing people.
In the previous post you claimed that you like to get acquainted with people, their character, that you like to know alot about them first, that hopefully they will tell you about themselves with a description filled with facts and ideas, etc. That you look to see what kinds of discussions they prefer, what kinds of people they prefer, what their lifestyle is, etc.
Yet in reality, at least with me, you didn't take any of that route. We've never talked, you've never asked me questions about myself, about my experiences, my ideas, what kinds of people I prefer, what my lifestyle is and what changes in it I want. You haven't spent any time getting acquainted with ME.
Yet, you still felt (at least last night in the chat) that you had the understanding of me to tell me that I do not think the way I do, that I do not want the things that I want, that I do not perceive things the way I do, and that basically, YOU knew more about me and my mind than I do.
So what was the post about? Calling you on your bullshit.
Why on earth would it make you feel bad? Everyone gets impressions about people. Nowhere did I suggest that that was a bad thing to do. However, attempting to push your own impressions onto someone without bothering to actually get to know them, and expecting them to roll over and accept your impressions as facts about themselves, when their own experiences and self knowledge say that you are dead wrong...that's arrogance, and possibly heading towards creating delusions for yourself of your ability to type and know others.Is this supposed to make me feel bad, because I have impressions about people? and because you remind me much more of other EIIs than IEEs.
I'm open to plenty of ideas, even those that oppose my own.You clearly aren't really open to discussing it, or open to any opposing ideas other than your own, if you really think I'm pretending to know more about your life than you do. For heaven's sake.
What I am not open to is some stranger trying to tell me that they know more about my own mind and my own experiences than I do.
Worse, however, is when instead of actually asking me real questions, they want to frame everything in terms of theoretical terminology first, and only ask questions and accept answers that suit their own impressions. Last night was more of you not being open to opposing ideas other than YOUR own impressions.
So yes, I was calling you on your bullshit claim about how you supposedly type people.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Huh? I just started talking to you yesterday and said that you reminded me of other EIIs. You obviously are kind of coming across as oversensitively Se-PoLR, how I forced the type onto you. That doesn't make any sense and surpasses my recollection. I did not presume to know about your life, but I simply said that I think you're an EII. It's a pretty simple, open-to-discussion statement with no amount of arrogance to it.
roflmao
yes, you just started talking to me yesterday, and the conver was full of you insisting that I was infj, even after me tell you no, you still kept going on about me being an infj.
You even sit there then and now and try to force fit anything said/done into further supporting your 'impression' instead of opening up your mind to the idea that you are wrong.
If this was reversed, if i said i was infj and you said you perceive me as enfp, you'd be taking the very same words/actions i've done and referred to them as Se role.
When/IF you're actually willing to walk your talk, feel free to pm me and talk with me without using any socionics terminology, otherwise, get real.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Heh, alright. A little childish, anndelise. A little childish.
First of all: implying that I don't like to talk to people and discuss with them their type, simply because I just started talking to you yesterday and we didn't even get a chance to talk further.
2nd: somehow I was forcing the type onto you, and that I knew all about your life?
What are you, twelve? Let's be real. If I'm going to be interested in talking to someone further about their type, it's not going to be in these harsh circumstances where the relationship is rather unexpectedly tense and heated. But I would like to maybe find out your thoughts on the matter on a day you might be feeling better, given some days or so. The hostility here is not doing so well for me.
I didn't say you don't like to talk to people to discuss with them their type, I implied/said that you type in ways other than just that. So to say that you do that in order to type, but then don't actually do it, shows that you type people via alternative methods than what you claimed.
I didn't say you were forcing a type on me, i said you were trying to tell me that you knew more about my mind, my experiences, my lifestyle than i did. I told you NeFi. You kept insisting FiNe. It's my brain, my experiences, my life, I know damned well how i process information. But still you kept insisting FiNe. What do you think you are doing when you retype someone or question their self-typing? You are informing them that they don't know themselves, or the theory, and that you know more about them than they do.2nd: somehow I was forcing the type onto you, and that I knew all about your life?
roflmaoWhat are you, twelve? Let's be real. If I'm going to be interested in talking to someone further about their type, it's not going to be in these harsh circumstances where the relationship is rather unexpectedly tense and heated. But I would like to maybe find out your thoughts on the matter on a day you might be feeling better, given some days or so. The hostility here is not doing so well for me.
another example of how little you know of me.
Also, interesting that you keep referring to how someone's actions influences your emotions. Also, how you keep interpreting things as being emotional attempts/motivations...instead of, you know, logic.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
Well I said I prefer to do this, talk to people (especially with more open minded people, like new users questioning their type--my personal favorite). Obviously I'm going to have some opinions before I start interacting. Not worth getting offended by them and then spamming all of this stuff, which I'm just not going to respond to. It's a little excessive.
These are the kinds of statements which make me doubt you're Ti-PoLR. Obviously you're not too good at Ti, but it certainly runs through your veins in a common way. I don't see how you show any vulnerability in this area.
Yes, certainly this is an underlying motivation. How could that be mistaken for anything else? Do you think I stalk you or something?
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
I don't think many people do. But I've tried to understand, it's just nonsense to me. Sorry.
That's not what I'm talking about. I said Fe.
Oh I don't know. Ask her.
It has nothing to do with Fe.There you go again with your passive-aggressive shit. And you call me the "valuer" for all the "taunts" I make? Hypocrite.
I don't think either of you have that knowledge. Ann has begun talking to me yesterday, and already I dislike her tone and expectations. You on the other hand, I've spoken with you a lot, and opened up to you. You're one person out of many.
I didn't say he doesn't do ANY of that. I was just saying that the way he claims to type people isn't what he actually does...at least in some cases.
It's like when we, as humans with egos, ignore negative aspects of ourselves, and only focus on the positive aspects. We might describe ourselves as doing something via our ideal way, but the reality is more complex than what we've claimed.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
Exactly. I already stated twice that doing such is something I prefer to do, and I don't know why you're picking on me about it. It's actually something I do a lot. I like to PM or IM people and hold private conversations.
Lol. Shut up. You people seriously need to stop PMSing. It all starts with one comment, and you just like to pretend you're always the good guy. Doesn't work like that.
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
Yeah, and you're being worthless here. You haven't supplied anything to this thread that has to do with the OP or Socionics, and you keep misinterpreting everything I say. I don't know how to assist you further.
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
Sounds like people need to get their facts straight before making assumptions and spamming a variety of thoughts towards me that I don't care to hear. Or else you're simply going to get my opinion in return, and you don't like my opinion. Lesson learned? Are we done?
okies, just so long as we're clarified on that part.
IEE 649 sx/sp cp
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
polikujm is more lively than ever. Asston, what do you type him as?
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
I think you base your typing of me and others too much on how we go about talking online, basically our methods of expressing ourselves. Te is often going to seem a lot dryer and without much emotional concern naturally. Something I notice that you've been saying irks you. There's a dominating Te side to me often, and a mostly underlying Ni/Se-seeking side that you're more familiar with. I'm beginning to realize however that a lot of typing mistakes have been based on how someone "sounds," and not really who they are. The excuse gets played time and time again that there is mimicry afoot, which is sort of just missing the point of understanding the deeper concepts in a type involved. You're looking way too much at physical characteristics--and from what I've learned, there tends not to be much lurking in the shallow end.
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:08 AM.
Well it's best not to categorize these outer appearances too much. Sure niffweed seems dryer in communication than I am, but to not call me a dry communicator and that I'm more emotionally lead is a still a mistake. I think he tends to express things more on the Te side, similarly to Expat, yet still has a dominant Ni. Has to do more with personality, upbringing, lifestyle, habits etc.
If you don't see Ni/Se-seeking, or think you're an ENTj and not Se dominant, even though to me you don't come across like an ENTj, or an "ESTj," again similar to popular forum member Expat, because you seem way more Ti/Fe inclined than he is just in the way you chose to follow Socionics, make a personalized internal system of it, emote yourself frequently to bring a certain attention to your opinions--then you are still entitled to think what you want. I see most people with your line of reasoning not getting far explaining things to others here. "It just is" doesn't work, because anything could "just be." You have to actually word these things out, and they have to match up with real socionics. Big ideas that are also clear and sensical, representations of the information, not just little impressions like "INTjs piss me off," or "patton iz my heroz brah" or something, then just quoting things but not making the factual connections for people. It's writing an essay full of quotes you put at the end of arguments, but you still have to tie them back to the beginning.
Your logic seems very introverted. Sure I've read everything you and other socionix people have written about the IMs, and these ideas aren't too realistic or even provable to begin with--you have more intuitives trying to explain them with concepts, but they are still limited (I can link these to people, if you PM me, even though I think using real Socionics websites would be a definite better way to learn--socionix is a different theory, a point to yet be challenged and disproven. everyone has a slightly different understanding though, not really the issue.). To see those as having a stronger essence more true than what I've actually experienced in people (which yes I've been open to and debated), and most other's experience on this forum--it's a lot more counter-intuitive now, and I think it has been for a lot of people here. What you read on Socionics sites will be much closer to the truth, and will be clear and relatable--written by favored Socionicists.
You never struck me as ENTj in the slightest--maybe your idea of them (but still it's not a very well developed idea). They all look similar in the face, but differ in their personality. And you do have some habit of mixing up certain elements of Socionics, which does still show you having some consistency with the theory, a common selling point for your ideas I believe.
I don't really understand why you like to say these bad things about me, that aren't really true at all. But I don't really care. Just comes off as childish to me.
I did not read all the posts, not even half of them, not even third of them.
But one thing I can say.
I talk to Ashton on msn messenger and he´s probably the man who knows more about Socionics than any other man here.
He has a clear view of the functions (IEs as socionerds like to say).
He has a clear view of the whole stuff.
He´s just respected by me, he´s a very nice guy and also a very intelligent and knowledgeable guy.
If someone fucks him, they´re fucking with me too. Though he doesn´t need that, he´s got my total support. Including killing people and etc. LOL.
Yeah I've talked to him too, for some time on and off, he is a nice guy. But his Fi-PoLR/Fe gets over the top sometimes which rocks the more natural Ni/Se attraction. Semi-duals aren't particularly too ideal either, but I'm not surprized you like him, because he's one of the few people who think you're actually a Delta. So that's that.
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:09 AM.
Oh. And there was I thinking it was his mother.
Yeah, good guess IMO.Ne-INXj. I want to say INTj because I see him utilizing a lot of the same mannerisms and phrasing that are starkly reminiscent of Niffweed. And he makes the same kind of blatant-devaluing comments quite a bit.
Why would he mimic niffweed? He idolizes niffweed? ... Funny, niffweed has aspergers syndrome. Just like polikujm.
Especially if you are unable to read facial expressions like a neurotypical person.
He was actually saying you are like niffweed.
Nice opinion. We all have one.
Why are you bringing these areas up? We're talking about socionics. Going off on lifestyle, habits, & upbringing just muddles the issue and loses socionics in relativism. Socionics types a person as a whole; it doesn't count out lifestyle, habits, and upbringing.
No, anything couldn't 'just be'. Normally, peoples ability to match what they read with their personal observations / experiences makes up for a lack of full explanation. If you're completely disconnected from the world around you then maybe anything can 'just be', but that isn't the case here.
So you think you can judge real socionics? How many types have you been over the past few months? Hmm.. ILE, ILI, LII, EII, IEI.. any others?
Way to back up your statements with insurmountable proof.
But remember - you can't read faces very well.
once again the point isn't backed by an example making it too subjective and meaningless.
You bypass the point and wrongfully caricature it as name calling, then act like you're taking the high road. Pathetic
This is getting too fun for me I think, with crazedrat coming in suddenly to sharpen his pencil. You guys will go into pointless debate and agreement, to never really debate and agree about anything in the end. Quite the eternal predicament.
Thanks for sounding so intelligent, but acting silly. I have no reason to really discuss Socionics with people who don't address me in a respectable and factual way. It tires on me eventually. I'm sure the people worth knowing, will know, and the faux pointless arguments will progress further into my uncertain mind. You beta men have a bad habit on ganging up on others who don't share your ideology--labeling them whatever next term you learn from your textbook. The truth is it's not about the argument, because you're just parrots reacting to and copying everything I say, and actually misinterpreting it from the very beginning.
You should go back to reread Aushra and read some type descriptions about ILIs. Then you might understand why so many people disagree with you.Ne-INXj. I want to say INTj because I see him utilizing a lot of the same mannerisms and phrasing that are starkly reminiscent of Niffweed. And he makes the same kind of blatant
You can't build a house on the sand.
Have fun. I won't be a part of this endless art.
For what's worth, I personally think PJ could easily be INTp, yet I still think his slimy tendency to offhandendly craft his posts as a list of slightly sarcastic putdowns is one of the most irritating traits I've managed to witness. Yet, it could be worse. Could be Joy.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
.
Last edited by mfckr; 12-25-2014 at 12:09 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
