The16types Typings Spreadsheet

[at sirac son of sirac]

@ooo,

Well, any socionics I use, it's either from articles which can be referenced, or it's my own observations, which can be supported by referenced articles, and, or, it's consistent with the overall theory too.

So, I use this to type you as IEI. I don't know why it's a big deal. You type as INFP in MBTI, yet you want to be ESI in socionics. It doesn't make sense to change two dichotomies like that. It's describing two different entities. Although, sometimes you change it from ESI to EII. But, i've found with Fe types, often their language is different. Especially Fe in Se quadra, it's like it's fun to argue or something.

Anyway, it's all good, you have a good day/morning/night whichever you are

[ooo]

look sirac, u can type me all u want and display ur bias all u like. what i was saying is that it's simply rude, to me, to being called IEI from someone who in more occasions threw offending notes at IEIs and whatnot. can u get the logic? ok bye.

[Sol]

it's simply rude, to me, to being called IEI

it's simply correct. while rude is your complaint and inappropriate as you think youself as INFP

[Not A Communist Shill]

4 May 2016
Looking at those who have posted in the last year, these are individuals I feel comfortable with agreeing strongly with their own self-typings. They are in order of post count. I would like to say I am 90%-95%+ certain their types are correct, but I do not trust myself to give such a figure, and I feel that many of these, while I believe their self-typing to be congruous with said type, they could almost as easily be their kindred type (e.g. LII vs. LSI etc.), or some other type (I think kindred or mirror would generally be most probable alternative types based on my overall thoughts here). My view is that in such instances, the person's own self-perception must be of paramount value. (Finally, I may have some people's current self-typings wrong, which is unintentional: I only wish to put self-typings I agree with here).

ILE: @mu4, @xerx, @1981slater, @The Ineffable, @Jack Oliver Aaron, @SlavaPHP
LII: @Logos, @Ms. Kensington, @Pa3s, @jason_m, @ClownsandEntropy, @RSV3, @Avalonia
SEI: @lemontrees
ESE:

SLE: @Ananke
LSI: @Myst, @miss BabyDoll, @Pole Ninja
IEI: @Starfall, @strrrng, @Aylen, @silke, @glam, @SisOfNight, @summerprincess
EIE: @golden

SEE:
ESI: @blackburry, @Olga
ILI: @Capitalist Pig, @Scapegrace, @Contra, @ragnar
LIE: @Narc, @Adam Strange, @May

IEE: @Galen, @Kim, @anndelise, @Animal, @Raver, @Simon Ssmall, @SyrupDeGem, @applejacks, @sapphire
EII: @Minde, @April, @Taknamay, @Birdie
SLI: @Waster
LSE: @UDP

22 Oct 2016
I think the quoted post is still true in my perception. If any of the individuals have changed their self-typings since, then should not be on here. There are individuals since this was posted who should probably be included, but I am reluctant to fish for additions lest I somehow lower my bar of qualification (i.e. that I agree strongly with their self-typings). Perhaps if I was to do the process again from scratch, I'd be able to make it up-to-date.

Probably 5-10% of those typings have change to "no opinion" or an alternative type since 2016, in line with those individuals who have become less certain or who have changed their self-typing. My rule was to only include individuals whose self-typings I agreed with strongly and/or without serious reservations. I think I could probably add a few more individuals to the list, although I don't feel especially inclined to do so at the moment. I suppose my view is that must be a certain period of stability or consistency before I could add someone to such a list.

[Sol]

add
summerprincess, selftypes as IEI

[ooo]

it's simply correct. while rude is your complaint and inappropriate as you think youself as INFP

rude is u telling me what i think of myself lol, as if u know

rude is u intromitting the conversations i was having with someone else just to extrapolate the part u want to point out... as usual

rude is that u keep applying standards (on me) that u don't even follow urself, for ur IR list is full of self typed MBTI P whom u types as J

rude is that u keep forgetting that this is socionics, not MBTI, and that the 2 admittedly don't match 100%

rude is that i told u already to leave me alone, and here u are.

gosh... for ur own concern, yes, i'm calling u 2 both (sol and sirac) out on ur bullshit. come complain that this is not Fi just to share in the next post how Fi are honest and whatnot. let me have a laugh pls

[User Name]

rude is u intromitting the conversations i was having with someone else just to extrapolate the part u want to point out... as usual

Te Lead confirmed lol

[Sol]

rude is u telling me what i think of myself lol, as if u know

I know that you always were original in thinking processes. Too original for any EII.
I hope they'll help you to type SLE to LSE and you both be happy.

[ooo]

I know that you always were original in thinking processes. Too original for any EII.
I hope they'll help you to type SLE to LSE and you both be happy.

i hope you'd see that there's more to relationships than socionics, but i doubt thatd make u happy

[Aylen]

I thought Bert makes you angry. Never understood why you paid so much efforts to fight with him. His messages were a little senseless.

I never understand why you type a bunch of strangers on youtube or on the forum so it's ok. You have your reasons... I have mine for doing the things I do.

Bert has irritated me, sure, but true anger? Why? If I did get angry with him it was so fleeting I don't even remember it now so must not have been too intense or memorable? This is the internet, we don't know each other. What irritated me about the ESE typing is that it felt passive aggressive because he has said that ESE = stupid in his mind. Don't know about you but I don't like being called stupid but if someone is going to do it then just say it outright to me. Don't make a veiled accusation of it that only you and maybe your inner circle will get. I pick up on that stuff.

Those who have known me longer on this forum know I have called several people out for that. I don't care if people talk behind my back but if I find out I might just say something too. Omg that is so Se! Only Se egos speak their mind! Everyone else is just a bunch of complacent 9s avoiding conflict or lashing out angrily. Sarcasm... It's not. It's understanding how people influence others... I will counterbalance it when I am inspired to. Some people don't care how they are perceived and others do. I want to be completely understood, ideally, but it is rare to be completely understood by anyone. Just so we are clear, I know I am not stupid and I am pretty sure those who call me that know it too. People who might think I am stupid probably won't say it. Saying someone is stupid is often a way to dismiss another's points with prejudice. Bert will get that reference. Not sure that is what he did to me.

The only people I have been angry with on this forum directly related to something more personal between us. So like I said I have not had a personal relationship, or a one on one, with Bert so people might be reading too much into my responses to him typing me ESE. I gave him a chance to explain why. When he didn't I decided I would get him to reveal more about himself, instead of how he perceived me and why. It helps me understand others better. I think a few people caught on to how I get people to reveal themselves by engaging in a little conflict with them. It makes the forum a bit more interesting too, at least for those not conflict averse, and sometimes something new is learned. I have demonstrative Fi. I think most people do not understand how the demon function can be used as a game. They should look into it.

8. Demonstrative Function
I
A person uses this element mainly as a kind of game, or to ridicule those who he thinks take it too seriously. They often intentionally go against its conventional usage simply to prove a point in favor of their creative function. However, this function is used quite often in private, to produce information of its element to support their creative function when focusing on making contact with the external world.

A person will often have just as sophisticated an understanding of this function as his or her leading function. Unlike the ignoring function it plays a major part in a person's worldview, since as the vulnerable function of one's dual it requires especially delicate attention. Thus, when a person is given information regarding the element in the demonstrative function by someone else, they will tend to take it as obvious information that is irrelevant to completely focus on. One will often use the demonstrative function to defend and further support their beliefs made in the vulnerable function.

The demonstrative function is easiest function to use (after the base function) yet often occurs sporadically. When one experiences a problem regarding this function, one must correct it as it does play a vital part in a person's worldview.

If anyone is unsure about my motives, feelings, thoughts, etc... in relation to my type (or anything else) all they have to do is ask (like sirac did) instead of making up a new type for me or distorting what I say, or do, to justify their typing of me. It is weird when someone is so invested in their typings of others that they don't even bother to ask questions. The worst offenders don't even know their own type. Some people have asked me things in private and it has cleared up a lot of misunderstandings. What a novel idea, right... asking.

So, being annoyed with someone does not equal anger. I am in touch with my intuition and feelings which includes anger. When I am angry I find a way to express it and resolve it. Otherwise it is like this bitter poison that can eat you up.

People on this forum have strange ideas of what anger looks like and would probably be terrified to deal with real anger irl. I have been around lots of angry people and know how to deal with it without backing down. So to one person it makes me E9 and to another it makes me Se or Fi. I took a look at the spreadsheet which verifies that it is all subjective. I have yet to see someone type in a truly objective way. There may be some closer than others but in the end how you feel about someone is going to influence your typing and most people base that on their self typing.

it's nice when IRL distracts you from local assylum

Yeah some things that are very real to me...

[Bertrand]

actually my entire point has always been that you look down on ESE which is why you see being typed as one as an insult, not that I look down on them (if you think of benefactor relations it makes a lot more sense as a projection of yours onto me rather than it being true as a function of my actual ITR--in other words, I may be factually wrong, but not intending to insult). it hardly matters at this point though, because I fundamentally agree with your assertion that typing is subjective and not meant to be taken so seriously as to actually get angry over, whether insult or not, in the first place. if you think I was insulting you, you would have to reckon that with the even more clear fact of my distaste for beta [1], from which anything would be a step up. so you can say I don't like ESE, which isn't true, but even if you assume it to be true, its still not really an insult if I'm moving you up in the grand scheme of my internal subjective ranking. in any case, if you prefer to be thought of as IEI i accept that, since if the spreadsheet has shown me anything its that people care about consensus over truth and inasmuch as that is the case its all meaningless anyway

I also think the more I come to like ESE the less you fit my conception of them, so maybe you've been right all along, but inasmuch as that is the case it becomes an insult because I'm essentially learning you're not good enough for ESE. in the end, we're just talking past eachother since what you deem to be the basis for an insult and what I deem to be the basis are two different standards (intent), hence the more I try not to insult you by your own criterion the more I feel guilty internally for doing exactly that. in other words, the nicer I try to be the more you take offense and vice versa. in the final analysis if I concede you being IEI and you and scarper are queen and white knight it does make sense. now both of you would have the world believe its simply because you're just two amazing people who can get along with anyone despite ITR, but I think a quick trip through everyone's posting history shows that to be manifestly untrue

the bottom line is I'm willing to concede we live in two different worlds and our language reflects that and communication is difficult which leads to conflict, which I think neither of us feels all that deeply (as in true bad blood), but from the outside looks pretty bad. ultimately I think we both understand things well enough and we each have our separate circles to tend to and that's perfectly alright

[1] which by the way I don't concede, but let's operate on your perception of me for the sake of argument

[Aylen]

actually my entire point has always been that you look down on ESE which is why you see being typed as one as an insult, not that I look down on them (if you think of benefactor relations it makes a lot more sense as a projection of yours onto me rather than it being true as a function of my actual ITR--in other words, I may be factually wrong, but not intending to insult). it hardly matters at this point though, because I fundamentally agree with your assertion that typing is subjective and not meant to be taken so seriously as to actually get angry over, whether insult or not, in the first place. if you think I was insulting you, you would have to reckon that with the even more clear fact of my distaste for beta [1], from which anything would be a step up. so you can say I don't like ESE, which isn't true, but even if you assume it to be true, its still not really an insult if I'm moving you up in the grand scheme of my internal subjective ranking. in any case, if you prefer to be thought of as IEI i accept that, since if the spreadsheet has shown me anything its that people care about consensus over truth and inasmuch as that is the case its all meaningless anyway

I also think the more I come to like ESE the less you fit my conception of them, so maybe you've been right all along, but inasmuch as that is the case it becomes an insult because I'm essentially learning you're not good enough for ESE. in the end, we're just talking past eachother since what you deem to be the basis for an insult and what I deem to be the basis are two different standards (intent), hence the more I try not to insult you by your own criterion the more I feel guilty internally for doing exactly that. in other words, the nicer I try to be the more you take offense and vice versa. in the final analysis if I concede you being IEI and you and scarper are queen and white knight it does make sense. now both of you would have the world believe its simply because you're just two amazing people who can get along with anyone despite ITR, but I think a quick trip through everyone's posting history shows that to be manifestly untrue

the bottom line is I'm willing to concede we live in two different worlds and our language reflects that and communication is difficult which leads to conflict, which I think neither of us feels all that deeply (as in true bad blood), but from the outside looks pretty bad. ultimately I think we both understand things well enough and we each have our separate circles to tend to and that's perfectly alright

[1] which by the way I don't concede, but let's operate on your perception of me for the sake of argument

Show me where I look down on ESE? It was never a matter of whether you liked or disliked ESE to me. I didn't care if you liked me or not. I cared that you were repeatedly putting a type on me that you said was stupid, more than once. It doesn't take a genius to figure out why.

Yes, total EII, but the volume is so low I can't make much out. Is this an english as a second language situation? cause, and I'm about to demonstrate my PoLR, ESL tends to make people out to be dumber than they are and I associate stupidity with ESE, which would explain my strong (admittedly biased and unfair, possibly evil, definitely morally imperfect) impression

edit 2: oh what the hell, I'll make a list since I'm bored:

• I hate working with ESEs and they hate me back. They come off as stupid and lazy manipulators who simply marshal social capital in order to make getting them to do anything more costly than simply doing it yourself. It works out though, because even if they did do it, it would probably be worse than if it got left undone. Only injustice is they tend to get paid for being an active detriment to the institution and everyone around them who pulls their own weight.

*snip*

• Maritsa gives me a strong ESE vibe--has no one else seen this and pointed it out?--I find this incredibly irritating because she pops up everywhere

You can't see why I felt a little insulted?

[ooo]

good job Aylen~ same stuff I was complaining about with sirac tbh (and I guess now we have to be the same type for thinking this is rude similarly, aha.... anyway I remember one of your rants against Bertrand from back then where Sol stepped out to re-type you as EII/ESI, because "oh look at the Fi!" smh)

[Bertrand]

You can't see why I felt a little insulted?

when I say I associate stupidity arising out of ESE its just the strongest example of Fe, which is

at the same time feel as if they are forced to worship the "fetish" - a stupid impression made from the most miserable and most primitive version, remotely resembling their EGO program - the area of ​​their innate professionalism, according to which each of them feels like a congenital "lawmaker", an "expert", a "judge", but certainly not a servant performer of the most crude and primitive of her designs.

you exhibit "stupidity" in exactly this way. I noted that its a perceptual effect and objectively an "unfair, biased and possibly evil" effect of perception. if you can't understand this then we are hopelessly at odds because you can't understand why anyone might find Fe "stupid" but not the person. the consequence is you cannot broaden your perspective to a truly jungian view which contextualizes the "evil" out of these associations. inasmuch as you're locked into your commitment to battling over these issues without capacity to rise above them the evil is just as much in you as me, though. in other words, I view you as a self, and you view my view you of you as solely constrained to your ego, thus my statements rankle you in an unintended way. in sum, you've missed the point and continue to do so. by manufacturing offense in this way you can bond with others over a common cause but its all very empty and misguided from my point of view

[Aylen]

when I say I associate stupidity arising out of ESE its just the strongest example of Fe, which is


you exhibit "stupidity" in exactly this way. I noted that its a perceptual effect and objectively an "unfair, biased and possibly evil" effect of perception. if you can't understand this then we are hopelessly at odds because you can't understand why anyone might find Fe "stupid" but not the person. the consequence is you cannot broaden your perspective to a truly jungian view which contextualizes the "evil" out of these associations. inasmuch as you're locked into your commitment to battling over these issues without capacity to rise above them the evil is just as much in you as me, though. in other words, I view you as a self, and you view my view you of you as solely constrained to your ego, thus my statements rankle you in an unintended way. in sum, you've missed the point and continue to do so. by manufacturing offense in this way you can bond with others over a common cause but its all very empty and misguided from my point of view

I was explaining what was going on with me at the time we were going back and forth in the past. I have moved on so you are off the mark. The post wasn't even about you. It was about me. You were merely an example and to pretend it wasn't irritating at the time would leave out an important detail while explaining the difference in my anger and irritation. I wasn't intending to get you riled up over it. For that I apologize but not for what I said.

[Bertrand]

>ive moved on

>reposts year old post from then newbie

well, I'm glad you moved on

[Aylen]

>ive moved on

>reposts year old post from then newbie

well, I'm glad you moved on

Me too and I only reposted to show you why it was irritating then. Not to stir things up again.

[Exodus]

i wasn't even alive yet but i got chills. genius ad campaign. also, i miss the 70s. lol.

I know it's not the 70s but I can't help but be a little partial to the 80s/90s:

https://youtu.be/SkNl5JiagW4?t=46

[at sirac son of sirac]

look sirac, u can type me all u want and display ur bias all u like. what i was saying is that it's simply rude, to me, to being called IEI from someone who in more occasions threw offending notes at IEIs and whatnot. can u get the logic? ok bye.

rude is u telling me what i think of myself lol, as if u know

rude is u intromitting the conversations i was having with someone else just to extrapolate the part u want to point out... as usual

rude is that u keep applying standards (on me) that u don't even follow urself, for ur IR list is full of self typed MBTI P whom u types as J

rude is that u keep forgetting that this is socionics, not MBTI, and that the 2 admittedly don't match 100%

rude is that i told u already to leave me alone, and here u are.

gosh... for ur own concern, yes, i'm calling u 2 both (sol and sirac) out on ur bullshit. come complain that this is not Fi just to share in the next post how Fi are honest and whatnot. let me have a laugh pls

good job Aylen~ same stuff I was complaining about with sirac tbh (and I guess now we have to be the same type for thinking this is rude similarly, aha.... anyway I remember one of your rants against Bertrand from back then where Sol stepped out to re-type you as EII/ESI, because "oh look at the Fi!" smh)

The only thing that's consistent in your behavior is the dynamic nature of your emotions.

Here in the above quotes, you're calling out all sorts of 'rudes', simply for stating the factual point () that you're INFP (by your own admission) and that you're IEI.

From your column in the type sheet, how you describe people, instead of their type:

'lol'
'no'
'hmm'
'oddball'
'no'

Which you admit yourself you did for 'lols', not being serious, then saying you are serious.

You don't display statics of interactions, but instead continue to display hyper emotionality - the energetic condition, which is, you continually display Fe.

What's rude is your insulting of me for stating the obvious socionic fact.

Anyway, it's not the first time it's happened, other users, cuivinen, domr, act the same (Fe egos), finally they come round in spite of their histrionics.

For some reason you never seem to remember to thank me though

Edit: Your column would likely be described as 'rude', but, it's just you being , as everywhere.

[ooo]

for someone who doesnt like to stir shit up you're sure well full of it : )

[ooo]

ps, I suggest people obsessed with MBTI to perhaps change forum. oh no sorry WE ALL NEED SI-TE (?) DRAMA in our lives.

[at sirac son of sirac]

for someone who doesnt like to stir shit up you're sure well full of it : )

Drama creating - Fe, especially Beta NF

ps, I suggest people obsessed with MBTI to perhaps change forum. oh no sorry WE ALL NEED SI-TE (?) DRAMA in our lives.

Appeals to authority - aristocratic - Delta/Beta. Ignores factual information presented to know why is an Fe ego type (non Delta quadra, non valuing), instead prefers to rely on own imagined existence of type (Ni) whilst displaying thuggish attitude (Se valuing)

Your typing column for group 'lols', as you say, and your attempts to drag others into the conversation by broad appeals:

Beta NF Quadra

• Beta types tend to enjoy group activities where the whole group participates in generating a common emotional atmosphere, as in laughing at jokes, etc.
• Beta types tend to give more value to feelings when they are demonstrated with clear emotional expression, and tend to increase the level of their own emotional expression in order to get a reaction from other people. (You)

[Sol]

I never understand why you type a bunch of strangers on youtube or on the forum so it's ok.

I like it. Typing by Ne/Fi is funny proccess for LSE.
And I want to help others understand types better, where examples help.

> Bert has irritated me, sure, but true anger?

ok. "irritated"

> What irritated me about the ESE typing is that it felt passive aggressive because he has said that ESE = stupid in his mind.

well.. I don't exclude ESI possibility for him, which are close type
Gulnara (ESI) said that stoped talking with someone who asked "Are you stupid?". She had very high marks in school and studed ok (but not excellent) in uni on engineering speciality. She's for sure not stupid (though not good in logical confrontation), highly intelligent, knows this, but somehow takes such criticism as meaningful.

> Don't know about you but I don't like being called stupid but if someone is going to do it then just say it outright to me.

Mostly I get interest why, as possibly I or the opponent made a mistake somewhere. I understand that it's more about situation, than my general abbilities which I know relatively. Mb T types take easier such criticism. Seems I'd could to get deeper offence and worse emotions by F regions criticism or relation.

> Don't make a veiled accusation of it that only you and maybe your inner circle will get. I pick up on that stuff.

Fi types prefer to avoid direct or rude criticism.

> Saying someone is stupid is often a way to dismiss another's points with prejudice. Bert will get that reference.

I think he trolls. He may don't think bad about you, but to get fun from your reactions.

> I think a few people caught on to how I get people to reveal themselves by engaging in a little conflict with them.

conflict as the mean to know other one better. for Fi type this would sound as the heresy deserving to burn someone

> I have demonstrative Fi. I think most people do not understand how the demon function can be used as a game. They should look into it.

your demons are funny

> If anyone is unsure about my motives, feelings, thoughts, etc... in relation to my type (or anything else) all they have to do is ask (like sirac did) instead of making up a new type for me

I find it's funny to see new types for me, how differently people may perceive you and how far they are from the reality.

> It is weird when someone is so invested in their typings of others that they don't even bother to ask questions.

People may prefer to keep doubts than to do efforts to get more clear opinion. As they don't take the typing seriously enough for those efforts.

> People on this forum have strange ideas of what anger looks like and would probably be terrified to deal with real anger irl.

It's more a term question: irritation as term for slight anger, for example.

> I have yet to see someone type in a truly objective way.

This needs highly objective method which got objective proof. Socionics has no this still.

> There may be some closer than others but in the end how you feel about someone is going to influence your typing and most people base that on their self typing.

conformism is high in speculative regions like today typing

> Yeah some things that are very real to me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpZpvo4rQAE

[ooo]

sirac, u asked to be removed from the sheet to "sit yourself out of it". and the last 3 pages have been full of your passive aggressive comments to the people u dont like.

u call my attitude funny and rude for typing people in a way u dont like, yet u dont know why i typed certain people in a certain way, and i guess the lol really fits u, better than SLI.

SLI seems really off for u. but it's fine, keep typing me IEI, so we can keep being superegos and admire each others from afar lol

[Chae]

Y'all shy babes are endearing... BUT WHERE IS THE BATTLETYPING WHEN WE REALLY NEED IT HUHH?!


Plan A (nice) is... simply tagging people and asking politely to give their opinions in the sheet The incentive being that you get typed in return

@anndelise
@peteronfireee (please someone add this cute bun to the list, he's missing! @Director Abbie)
@FDG
@Viktor
@Olimpia
@Without Warning
@Arachne



If that doesn't work:

Plan B (evil): We need someone unlikeable with extremely controversial, completely off typings (that are also lowkey insulting!) that try to prove everybody wrong to get it going. Like someone who types @Troll Nr 007 ESI-Se 2w3 SX. That would be explosive. Then others want to correct and make a better column, causing a huge buzz and downright hatestorm. The result: the sheet and thread blow up, further attracting people. We have to lure said controversial typist in with making them believe that they are completely accurate, the best, and welcome here. That's the devious scheme, now we just need someone to bring in the bait person. (Maybe this plan is already ruined because I gave it away, but the person would have to be too dense and caught up in being right to get it.)

[DirectorAbbie]

I could make some pie charts.
But if I do, do I include the anonymous columns?
And do I only make pie charts of those who request one?

[Not A Communist Shill]

@Director Abbie there's probably no point including the anonymous data in any charts, because there is no way of determining whether the data is valuable (in the sense that is the opinion of an actual person).

[User Name]

I could make some pie charts.
But if I do, do I include the anonymous columns?
And do I only make pie charts of those who request one?

Yes please, that'd be great...

[DirectorAbbie]

Yes please, that'd be great...

User Name.png

[User Name]

User Name.png

Thank you so much! Cool, I'm 10% DHD...

[DirectorAbbie]

Director Abbie.png at sirac son of sirac.png

[Tonatiuh]

I could make some pie charts.
But if I do, do I include the anonymous columns?
And do I only make pie charts of those who request one?

Shoot.

[maniac]

Pie charts seems like too much, and a waste of time

[DirectorAbbie]

@lavos
@Cuivienen
@Number 9 large

Someone is mangling your columns. It looks like they sorted the columns to move all the inputs up, then fiddled with the results. I can put the old inputs back like I did for the column of @ooo but without protecting your column with your email the slob could just do it again.

[DirectorAbbie]

and a waste of time

I can waste my time however I please.

[at sirac son of sirac]

Thanks @Director Abbie,

I'm wondering what a graph distribution would be like of the frequency of each of the 16 types among the forum members. There's opportunities to compare self typing with other typing as a % of match. Also the most frequently typed type by other members of the forum as a whole.

Hmmm these are some complex charts/graphs IMO. I'm just liking the pie chart and thinking of ways to work with the information, but i'm new to it. So it's just ideas really, but I am enjoying the displays

Probably with the right ideas and the right graphs/charts display, a portfolio of types could be produced... However, i'll not get carried away just yet. I suppose I just didn't realize this could be quite so exciting

[Sol]

I can waste my time

As better alternative I offer you to add @summerprincess in the list. In case you take your duties seriously.

[at sirac son of sirac]

As better alternative I offer you to add @summerprincess in the list. In case you take your duties seriously.

Adding SLE to your list of possible typings, including LSI, and outside possibility of LSE.

[Sol]

Adding SLE to your list of possible typings, including LSI, and outside possibility of LSE.

it's nice
there are 8 another versions I was suspected in

[at sirac son of sirac]

it's nice
there are 8 another versions I was suspected in

Ah I see, you're looking for ways to feed your seeking