My typing of forum members

[Korpsy Knievel]

Continued from elsewhere out of concern for the disruption of Cupid's aim. Respec.

Let's now begin the greatest series of type examinations in the history of information metardolism. First up, the thing calling itself InvisibleJim, an E6 Ti-dom whose IJ temperament is hidden openly, even from himself, in his very own name:

1) Incorrect use of 'catastrophism'.

False. At only 7 posts in you're already predicting doom for the thread. That's some ridiculously myopic Ni, and it's yet another strong indicator that you're a static type who expresses discomfort when even trivial events deviate from expectatioons. In terms of the Big 5 scale that anxious and reactive rigidity displays very low openness to experience, something very consistent with an IJ temperament. Here's a good example of inability to tolerate external critique or disagreement with your opinions:

I don't think there is anything left to say on the matter. Now get stay out of my threads. As I politely stated when I was told I couldn't stop people viewing my posts I would close any thread I could when they chose to participate in an aggitative and non-constructive way. To be perfectly honest it's a waste of my time having to deal with someone with your juvenile mental issues and schizophrenic delusions.

^ Sounds just like maritsa shrieking hysterically at minde.

2) Involves k0rpsy posting.

Interesting that you harp on others for disqualifying, say, maritsa for simply being herself, while you habitually dismiss this or that person on the same weak grounds. There's a word for that nasty habit.

Sounds like a standard day in 16types considering yesterdays misuse and abuse of gnosticism.

Numerous strains of gnosticism posit that male and female are dualistic properties of the cosmos that will be dissolved into the transcendent unity of the pleroma as souls return from this impure world of divisions and strife to that realm of divine order and perfection. This unification of the sexes is also implied in the frequent hermaphroditic imagery of alchemical symbology. For instance the famous alchemical phrase, "Solve et coagula", or dissolve and unify. And as a matter of fact I just went looking to Google's image search for a relevant picture to illustrate my point, and the site suggested "Baphomet" right off the bat, a hermaphroditic deity often connected with gnosticism. Further, similar symbols and concepts are present in schools descending from the cults of Mani, Orpheus, Zoroaster, and others. Some aspects of this have even survived in muted form in modern christianity. So by joking that Abbie's statement on unification of spouses in marriage bordered on gnostic ideals, the allusion I was making was very apt.

Sorry, my bad, I forget:

The quote you've selectively truncated to advance your lies was something I said with full irony to pull a noob's leg, and it borrows a phrase from your protector maritsa. Another curious point in your antics is that you only provide "proof" of your histrionic accusations when you've distorted its presentation and/or meaning. Very symptomatic of Ti/Fe fuckery, plus general dishonesty. And rather pathetic that your only support for my claim of guru-hood is quite obviously from me making light of someone else.

I just had my lol button pressed.

Quite so.

Projecting your emotional state onto others, a sure sign you are 'winning' k0rpsy.

Which makes it all the funnier than you can't stop yourself from resorting to it at all turns.

Bronyism is patently Ti/Fe, and probably more stereotypically alpha than beta, though I'm sure a good portion of the delta crowd also resonates with its feel-good whimsy. However, you've also said this [ed: underlined for emphasis]:

Thread title in classic Russian mode.

Having many detailed/lengthy relationships with Delta types then I, perhaps more than others, appreciate (and then generally ignore) their input.

Feel free to ask queries and share your viewpoints in the other types accordingly.

Tell me more about your tears.

Tell me more about your reliance on appeals to pathos and the peanut gallery that ignore dispassionate argument and evidential proof.

Speaking of which, here's the tally of those who offered an opinion of your type in your embarrassment-closed type-me thread:

Ashton:

IXTj… LSI > LII; going by cog-styles, C–D seems prominent.

E1 or 6w5.

Echidna1000:

He's an ILI with a tendency to bleed Fi mobilising all over the place.

Ni Te > Ti Ne

Radio:

I still think Ti-IXTj (maybe INTj > ISTj I'm not sure) E6 sp/so or sx/so or something else with so.

lungs:

LII. I could probably be persuaded to see LSI but right now I don't.

6w5 most definitely. No opinion on instincts.

Absurd:

Well, Ti is there.

Gilly:

6w5/5w6 is obvious, leaning towards 6

I initially thought LSI when interviewing him for the first time on cam, LII is also possible but less likely. ILI doesn't make much sense IMO, just a very different style and energy from k0rp, cpig, other obvious ILIs.

Raver:

Imo, I'm going to go with Ti-LII 6w5 sp/sx from what I've seen of you.

Somavision:

Invisible Jim... thank you for your expression of special interest. Afraid can't really contribute much, from our meeting I'd doubt Se ego, but I wouldn't heavily bet on it. I think I initially got the impression of you as possibly ILI, but was in no way fixed on this - honestly wouldn't be surprised if you were LII ILI SLI or LIE. I'll put £1.50 each way on ILI. My relative ignorance with regards to the e-type system prevents me from even guessing at that.

chriscorey:

InvisibleJim, my dear, you are NiTe in every in every system, and I’m certain of it…. I think my method of “typing” people would only annoy you if I introduced it; I will however say this:
I have done extensive study in order to figure out my own type. I am NiTe/ILI and it is extremely difficult for me to find other people that are actually this type. I know this, because when I meet them, I don’t have to explain everything I say, because other ILIs just get it. The communication is clinical and without irrational crap, no matter what the topic is. I talk to several “NiTe” people on the web and you are one of three people I don’t need to explain myself to. I guess you could say this is a kind of intuitive “certainty” on my part….

siuntal:

w/ socionics type from semantics you come up as process + dynamic so Te-ILI is my guess. I don't remember seeing a single post where you would be explaning why something is the way it is, adopting a didactic tone and shelving information into categories - in other words, you would make for a poor dual for ExEs.

Ryan:

quasi identicals are fun to analyze in socionics

sometimes I imagine myself being an ILI and I really don't find a lot of differences between the two types

I guess I can see you as LII

truth to be told, you are much easier to type LII than some LIIs, but that's just MBTI remains and inconsistent thoughts I've collected over the years

Tackk:

My guess/conclusion/opinion/whatever is ILI-Te.

k0rpsy:

Static, merry, declaring, positivist, aristocratic, blah blah blah. LSI 6w5 sx/sp [ed: in examining that thread it appears I provided the lengthiest and most detailed analysis of your type out of anyone who responded.]

anndelise:

But yes, I vote now as him portraying valued Ti with subdued Te.

Kim:

I agree with the LSI typing.

-dom: 10 (66.67%)
-creative: 4 (26.67%)
Undecided logical: 1 (6.67%)

That's roughly 2:1 Ti > Te from a wide array of analysts. And if Somavision's ambiguous response is omitted the breakdown is 71.43% Ti > 28.57% Te, or almost 3:1 IxTj to IxTp.