Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Aestrivex's "Me-too typings"

  1. #1
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Aestrivex's "Me-too typings"

    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    there is at least one data point that is an enormous false negative -- polikujm, who has 100% concordance with ashton's very long list of typings. ashton's list, by its own merits, has a reasonable degree of independence from me-too-ness. polikujm's list which is a literal copy of most of ashton's list artificially replicates this property. so, clearly, this metric isn't perfect.
    Bwahaha!

  3. #3
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ashton View Post
    I like how niffweed is only a mere 1.6 points removed from the lowest rank
    Such estimate seems to be biased upwards, roundaboutly speaking.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  4. #4
    when you see the booty Galen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    everywhere at once
    Posts
    8,449
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Cool, agreement with another person counts as sheepishness. Thanks for the heads up niffweed.
    "And above all, watch with glittering eyes the whole world around you because the greatest secrets are always hidden in the most unlikely places. Those who don't believe in magic will never find it." -Roald Dahl

    http://forum.socionix.com/
    It's pretty cool

  5. #5
    Creepy-Snaps

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Galen View Post
    Cool, agreement with another person counts as sheepishness. Thanks for the heads up niffweed.
    That's what I think too.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    TIM
    LSE
    Posts
    18,006
    Mentioned
    162 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's a double-edged sword. Niffweed should know that already.

  7. #7
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's important to keep in mind that this just gives an overview of who's an independent thinker, and who follows the crowd. It does not show how accurate "the crowd's" typings are (if the crowd is highly accurate, then it's good to agree with the crowd), nor does it show the reason for the independent thinkers' divergence from the crowd -- those who are less accurate than the crowd will diverge just as much as those who are more accurate than the crowd.
    Last edited by Krig the Viking; 12-20-2011 at 04:56 AM. Reason: typo
    Quaero Veritas.

  8. #8
    EffyCold The Ineffable's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Wallachia
    TIM
    ILE
    Posts
    2,195
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Further evidence that niff is a Ni-Base type . So if the typings of X and Y correspond even when they don't know each other, this still tells a story about them. Statistically. Spiritual unconscious collaboration. While the lesser numbers become more relevant, that happens only in a cultural, conventional way. Galilei was certainly a crackpot for his time, what did that tell about whether he was right or wrong?
    I don't disagree with him that me-too'ing happens, just it can't be quantified like that, it's just a pretense pf doing so.
    Shock intuition, diamond logic.
     

    The16types.info Scientific Model

  9. #9
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    It's important to keep in mind that this just gives an overview of who's an independent thinker, and who follows the crowd. It does not show accurate "the crowd's" typings are (if the crowd is highly accurate, then it's good to agree with the crowd), nor does it show the reason for the independent thinkers' divergence from the crowd -- those who are less accurate than the crowd will diverge just as much as those who are more accurate than the crowd.
    [1]Not at all, Niffweed's error is that he assumes convergence is always directly caused by adopting the opinions of others(or "me-too-ing"). The problem is that convergence typings are expected to occur if Socionics is a valid phenomenon with reproducible results, and to equate independent thinking with having divergent typings is scientifically absurd in its analysis.

    The only possibly accurate results from Niffweed's study are those that concern members with large lists who converge significantly so(especially when subtyping is utilized), or those who seem to have basically copied the list. Obviously this includes polikujm, who has already been suspect, so no new information there.

    Socionics is a perspectivist subject and not everyone has the same perspective of the people they type, the theoretical types as they understand them and believe to manifest in reality, and Socionics in general. This means there must be a degree of divergence otherwise there is an anomaly, but not to the extent that people are not expected to converge.




    [1] - "nor does it show the reason for the independent thinkers' divergence from the crowd -- those who are less accurate than the crowd will diverge just as much as those who are more accurate than the crowd"

    You may have addressed my point here but I couldn't say for certain.
    Last edited by EyeSeeCold; 12-20-2011 at 04:00 AM. Reason: spelling
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

  10. #10
    what is essential is invisible to the eye fox's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Space
    TIM
    Seer
    Posts
    12,804
    Mentioned
    367 Post(s)
    Tagged
    9 Thread(s)

    Default

    I miss niffweed & expat. They always gave out good information & interesting posts that actually made sense.
    Quote Originally Posted by jxrtes View Post
    betas should be kept in zoos for children to stare and throw pop corn at.

  11. #11
    Haikus Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    22,740
    Mentioned
    531 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    Who had time to do this analysis. Ughh.

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 1970
    Posts
    0
    Mentioned
    Post(s)
    Tagged
    Thread(s)

    Default

    So basically, if one has any convergence with another it is because he has a direct link into the hive mind? Way to go there, champ. You got us. We all just agree with each other for the sake of it, except for the oh so independent and original thinkers. Don't you see you are just fracturing the typings and consensus of the forum even more? Sure, there's confirmation bias and sticking others into a predefined category going on here, but that is an integral part of socionics in the first place. And don't seriously try to act like all typings that differ from the majority are forward-thinking and thought-provoking, because it is just as likely they are nothing more than batshit insane typings that have nothing to do with anything.

    (EDIT: After being questioned as to which antecedent the pronoun "you" refers to, I felt it necessary to make it known that I am talking to aestrivex, the creator of the so-called "me-too typing list".)
    Last edited by nil; 12-20-2011 at 04:37 AM.

  13. #13
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
    [1] - "nor does it show the reason for the independent thinkers' divergence from the crowd -- those who are less accurate than the crowd will diverge just as much as those who are more accurate than the crowd"

    You may have addressed my point here but I couldn't say for certain.
    Yeah, technically all the data shows (and all it's trying to show) is who tends to agree with the majority, and who tends to differ from the majority. It says nothing about who's right and who's wrong. Being an independent thinker doesn't mean you're correct, and following the majority opinion doesn't mean you're wrong.

    The question is, how much of the agreement of the majority is due to correct independent typings, and how much of it is due to the tendency to agree with people's self-typing and/or groupthink? That's what I'm interested in trying to figure out. This data doesn't show that, but it' a step in the right direction.

    What interests me is things like who agrees with whom, are there any groups who tend to agree, etc. You can get a bit of an intuitive sense of that just from interaction on the forum, but a statistical analysis of the data would give you a clearer picture.
    Quaero Veritas.

  14. #14
    In Transition Raver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    TIM
    Ne-IEE 6w7 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,698
    Mentioned
    92 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Yeah, technically all the data shows (and all it's trying to show) is who tends to agree with the majority, and who tends to differ from the majority. It says nothing about who's right and who's wrong. Being an independent thinker doesn't mean you're correct, and following the majority opinion doesn't mean you're wrong.

    The question is, how much of the agreement of the majority is due to correct independent typings, and how much of it is due to the tendency to agree with people's self-typing and/or groupthink? That's what I'm interested in trying to figure out. This data doesn't show that, but it' a step in the right direction.

    What interests me is things like who agrees with whom, are there any groups who tend to agree, etc. You can get a bit of an intuitive sense of that just from interaction on the forum, but a statistical analysis of the data would give you a clearer picture.
    Yeah I agree with you Krig, it seems like niffweed had the right idea, but its difficult to determine why people type a certain way unless you can read their mind.
    "Nothing happens until the pain of staying the same outweighs the pain of change."

    Ne-IEE
    6w7 sp/sx
    6w7-4w5-9w1

  15. #15
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, me too!
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  16. #16
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1) x and y coincide....is it because x follows y? because y follows x?

    2) I have [90% concordance] with Mune (SEI), Abbie (LSE)
    Subterranean (LII IMO) with Aestrivex (ILI) and Marie (EII)
    The Hotel Ambush (LII) has [90% concordance] with them too.
    Ssmall has [90% concordance] with Marie (EII), Kassie (IEE IMO) and Somavision (IEE?)

    3) Is it easier for people to agree ("see the same things") with those with whom we have positive intertype relations (neither conflict, nor superego and supervision)?

    4) It seems that most independent thinkers have [90% concordance] with Marie....

    4a) Is Marie's list some kind of absolute truth?
    4b) Is Marie cheating?
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  17. #17
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    1) x and y coincide....is it because x follows y? because y follows x?
    Or is it because x and y have independently arrived at the same result? No way to externally verify which is which, unfortunately.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    2) I have [90% concordance] with Mune (SEI), Abbie (LSE)
    Subterranean (LII IMO) with Aestrivex (ILI) and Marie (EII)
    The Hotel Ambush (LII) has [90% concordance] with them too.
    Ssmall has [90% concordance] with Marie (EII), Kassie (IEE IMO) and Somavision (IEE?)

    3) Is it easier for people to agree ("see the same things") with those with whom we have positive intertype relations (neither conflict, nor superego and supervision)?
    An interesting question. It makes sense that information would travel more easily along positive relations. There might be a mild influence, statistically, though I doubt it would be very strong.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    4) It seems that most independent thinkers have [90% concordance] with Marie....

    4a) Is Marie's list some kind of absolute truth?
    I was wondering about that. There seems to be a small secondary group typified by Marie84's typings. Are there other groups and sub-groups? How much is of this grouping effect is due to copycatting, and how much is due to theoretical differences, etc?

    Quote Originally Posted by 1981slater View Post
    4b) Is Marie cheating?
    No, of course not.
    Quaero Veritas.

  18. #18
    implied's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    7,750
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Maritsa33 View Post
    Who had time to do this analysis. Ughh.
    maritsa, aren't you a psychologist or something? or in research psych? i mean, afaik it is pretty standard to test something for interrater reliability. it is something that has pretty much not led me to say, "NIFF IS A FRAUD!" but "socionics is probably crap."
    6w5 sx
    model Φ: -+0
    sloan - rcuei

  19. #19
    Coldest of the Socion EyeSeeCold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Holy Temple of St. Augusta
    Posts
    3,693
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Yeah, technically all the data shows (and all it's trying to show) is who tends to agree with the majority, and who tends to differ from the majority. It says nothing about who's right and who's wrong. Being an independent thinker doesn't mean you're correct, and following the majority opinion doesn't mean you're wrong.
    Right.

    The question is, how much of the agreement of the majority is due to correct independent typings, and how much of it is due to the tendency to agree with people's self-typing and/or groupthink? That's what I'm interested in trying to figure out. This data doesn't show that, but it' a step in the right direction.
    Yeah, this was exactly my point. I wasn't sure from what you stated earlier.

    I don't really think you could deduce "me-too-ness" from statistics and logic alone.

    What interests me is things like who agrees with whom, are there any groups who tend to agree, etc. You can get a bit of an intuitive sense of that just from interaction on the forum, but a statistical analysis of the data would give you a clearer picture.
    You could figure that out through common sense / intuition, right. If you're going the statistical route, I suppose one thing to research could be convergence typings/ratings and the intertype relations. e.g. Duals converge the most on typings, Serious quadras diverge on typings more than Merry quadras etc.
    (i)NTFS

    An ILI at rest tends to remain at rest
    and an ILI in motion is probably not an ILI

    31.9FM KICE Radio ♫ *56K Warning*
    My work on Inert/Contact subtypes

    Socionics Visual Identification(V.I.) Database
    Socionics Tests Database
    Comprehensive List of Socionics Sites


    Fidei Defensor

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •