Relations of benefit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GK4705

Listen people:

These theories on celebrities types are flat out wrong.

I am INTJ (Socionics-not MBTI). All types I refer to will be socionics types.

Thus, I am a dominant introverted thinker with extraverted intuition. For all our interpersonal flaws, most INTJ's are excellent at reading people and coming to accurate conclusions regarding their (via real life or tv ect) strengths and weaknesses. We are also second to none in analyzing and understanding theories. Thus, I have learned to apply the theories of Jung and socionics and have been able to apply it to people on a regular basis with a great deal of accuracy. This is especially true when it comes to people in the alpha quadrable, because I share the same functions, and thus, values.

Bill Clinton-Intp

---

There is something fishy about Slick Willie. Most MBTI typologists seem convinced that he is either ESFP or ENFP but both have manipulative ethics of relations as second function and just watching his speeches and seeing him talk to people gives me the impression that there seems to be clear evidence of well toned manipulative ethics of emotions - and yet I cannot quite see the similarity to any INFPs either. So certainly INTP seems possible, but that would seem to make him such an unsual specimen that you might as well throw the type descriptions out of the window. I know couple of highly extroverted INTPs but neither of them can do Fe with anything like the exquisite skill that the former president has so evidently mastered. So what is going on?

... for a modern american example of an ENTP. Take a look at the latest J.K Rowling, author of the Hotter Potter books. Then look at pictures of Madonna. ( I do not have the code to post the pictures )

I still think that Madonna is an INTP... I have found that types that share features can be very closely matched in personality type if not the same type. Case in point... I share disturbingly simular features to Rose Mcgowen on Sergei Genin's site under ISFJ types....I'm ISTJ.

[/img]

Gjugo ESFJ

The head — the partner

1. The decision of tactical problems better is possible.
2. Can adequately realize itself in a role of the face-to-face leader in affairs of the practical-organizational plan. It is capable to carry away others.3. The way of an establishment of business contact substantially depends on emotional and valuable installations.4. The form of business activity is characterized by persistence in achievement of the purpose by successful detour of obstacles and complications in mutual relations.
5. The system of interaction with subordinates is under construction in view of emotional mutual relations.
6. It is declined to cooperating type of behaviour on the basis of mutual benefit. Can show elements of competing type.7. Reaches large results due to vigour, skilful motivation and a manipulation emotional attitudes.
8. Can manipulate ethical principles, be guided by " different game rules ".
9. Motives and the purpose: good intentions and mercenary promptings. Profit it is desirable within the framework of the law.
10. The attitude to the law: the letter of the law is preferred.
11. Strategy: full freedom of management within the framework of the law.

Think about Clintons record on Foreign policy and the controversial domestic matters of his administration's era.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pearl Eighty

... for a modern american example of an ENTP. Take a look at the latest J.K Rowling, author of the Hotter Potter books. Then look at pictures of Madonna. ( I do not have the code to post the pictures )

I still think that Madonna is an INTP... I have found that types that share features can be very closely matched in personality type if not the same type. Case in point... I share disturbingly simular features to Rose Mcgowen on Sergei Genin's site under ISFJ types....I'm ISTJ.

---

The visual identification is generally exceedingly tricky and not very reliable at the moment. I remember reading that Filatova discovered after having tested and photographed a vast number of people that there are at least about 200 different looks in Russia, and maybe more in the rest of the world. And yet members of different types can still look very similar. In my opinion the similarities are much more obvious in the body language, gestures and typical facial expressions than in the basic structure of the face which is often all you can really see in fairly formal still photos. The different subtypes can also look and even behave in very different ways.

In Socionics also extroversion and introversion are kind of difficult concepts, as introverts can often be highly social and extroverts painfully shy etc. More specifically:INTPs often have much better social skills than ENTPs, for example about INTPs:

When they interact with others they are softly spoken and unobtrusive, leaving others the impression that they are intelligent and educated. When asking someone for something, they usually do it in such a way as to rarely be denied.
http://www.socionics.com/prof/intp.htm

or about ENTPs:

ENTPs do not know how to keep the right psychological distance with people. This becomes especially noticeable during long term interaction. One day they can be friendly and the next day they can be completely opposite. They often behave unceremoniously and can rudely butt in on others conversations. ENTPs can also find it difficult to evaluate how others feel about them and therefore can make mistakes when choosing friends.
http://www.socionics.com/prof/entp.htm

I think that I agree with Sergei Genin when he says that you can build ...or use the process of elimination so to speak when typing (outside looking in).

He brought out that you can even use the type of relationship you share with a specific type of person as a "CLUE" to thier type designation.

Further, I believe this to mean the person of interests relationships or pattern of relations in general can be used as a 'CLUE' (such as the assymetrical relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton)

This in no way means that any of the Outside speculations and information gathering will be correct. How can we really know unless the person of interest tested? I do believe that with the amount of Press most celebrities get and want...you can come very close!

Also...I took the Introversion / Extraversion variable into consideration when involving my opinion about Madonna's type into consideration. Understand that it is only an opinion. :wink:

Last time I read there were 4 different facial type designations for each type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pearl Eighty

I think that I agree with Sergei Ganin when he says that you can build ...or use the process of elimination so to speak when typing (outside looking in).

He brought out that you can even use the type of relationship you share with a specific type of person as a "CLUE" to thier type designation.

Further, I believe this to mean the person of interests relationships or pattern of relations in general can be used as a 'CLUE' (such as the assymetrical relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton).

---

I thought about that too but in practise it just seems to be so very difficult. I mean do we still have any idea what types Bill and Hillary have?

Quote:

---

This in no way means that any of the Outside speculations and information gathering will be correct. How can we really know unless the person of interest tested? I do believe that with the amount of Press most celebrities get and want...you can come very close!.

---

It just seem that reaching an agreement is often extremely difficult and finding the definitive evidence in typing seems to be always just out of reach. I am always nitpicking, but how do you know whether you can trust the test results either - even the Clintons probably consulted a qualified practitioner. And just reaching a fair degree of certainty about one's own type often takes an awful lot of studying. It seems I am currently suffering from a compulsion to find some kind of closure and my posts almost inevitably end up pressuring you and everyone else but I feel that if we cannot reliably type people everything in socionics just starts to fall apart: maybe we all are just imagining things and the whole system has no more validity than horoscopes. If agreeing on the types of well known celebrities seems so extraordinarily difficult how can we even know that anyone of us is typing our closest ones correctly? Certainly myself included, and it depresses me.

Quote:

---

Also...I took the Introversion / Extraversion variable into consideration when involving my opinion about Madonna's type into consideration. Understand that it is only an opinion. :wink: .

---

I know and I am sorry, just try to bear with my unintentional patronising...

Quote:

---

Last time I read there were 4 different facial type designations for each type.

---

I think that Socionics.com mentions 4 different facial type designations and another Russian site mentioned more, maybe it depends on the degree of difference you allow for people with the same look, or does anybody know better?

It could be that I just had too much faith invested in Socionics and now the limitations of this field of enquiry are becoming all too apparent. Do you think it might be possible to find some firm ground by trying to type some easy cases? Or perhaps there are some Russian speakers out there who would have the patience to provide us with some advice on how to identify the sociotype reliably?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CuriousSoul

Well thanks for clearing it all out for me. I especially enjoyed your detailed account of how you reached your impressive conclusions, they make typing others so much easier. How did I ever manage without your help?

---

Is this reply directed at me?

Is this reply directed at me?[/quote]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CuriousSoul

Well thanks for clearing it all out for me. I especially enjoyed your detailed account of how you reached your impressive conclusions, they make typing others so much easier. How did I ever manage without your help?

---

Is this reply directed at me?

---

Sorry for the misunderstanding Joan. I referred to the previous poster GK4705 who enlightened us with his knoledge of Socionics but did not care to explain how he reched his conclusions.

Yes Agreed, typing peope you do not know is really hard so you should give reasons for the types you put on people. In fact, I see little point in trying to do it, but that is just my opinion. I'd like to hear more about how people have subjectively experienced different kinds of relations (When they have correctly typed themselves and partnet).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by metaiwan

Yes Agreed, typing peope you do not know is really hard so you should give reasons for the types you put on people. In fact, I see little point in trying to do it, but that is just my opinion. I'd like to hear more about how people have subjectively experienced different kinds of relations (When they have correctly typed themselves and partnet).

---

That is the one major advantage the Russians have, just read their forum as a (BabelFish translation) at www.socionics.org but with so few people posting here, what can one really do? Not everyone is that comfortable disclosing the details of their personal lives. I would say though, that I do see for example say that many of the finer points of the intertype relations chat seem to become apparent even in casual relations, sometimes even in conversations with virtual strangers. For instance the cartoon at socionics.com are kind of funny but sometimes it just feels quite eery, like when I met a guy who looked just like that ESFJ fellow and on top of all was even wearing a silly baseball cap turned backward, we had quite a long talk and sure enough he seemt to be ESFJ - as far as I can tell of course - it sure was easy to see the flaws in his arguments...
Any ideas on how to attract more posters?

This forum needs commercial. We should advertize it. If we think out, what we could give people with Socionics what they don't have yet, then they are here.

It's all about selling the dreams. That's something what ENTj type is specially good at. So perhaps we should find an ENTj type to make this forum big business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CuriousSoul

Theoretically you could seek out your Beneficiary, confidently play out your second function and watch with objective detachment as he/she falls head over heels in love with you. And report the results to this Forum! :wink:

---

It worked for 8 months and 20 days and then collapsed. When I was using my secondary Ti, she was falling in love. But when I used my primary Ne, she was scared :-) But the main problem was not in personality, but in characters (ennagrams and stuff).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m21

This forum needs commercial. We should advertize it. If we think out, what we could give people with Socionics what they don't have yet, then they are here.

It's all about selling the dreams. That's something what ENTj type is specially good at. So perhaps we should find an ENTj type to make this forum big business.

---

Socionics is not for ordinary people, it is for psychology exprerts. If you wanna sell it, sell it to psychologists, who care much for education. Psychologists are mostly ENFj, and they are not trusting brand new theories, but books from 70`. It is the majority. ENFj are not logical and does not like logic. Selling socionics would be hard. The only way I can see now is online training.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by false

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m21

This forum needs commercial. We should advertize it. If we think out, what we could give people with Socionics what they don't have yet, then they are here.

It's all about selling the dreams. That's something what ENTj type is specially good at. So perhaps we should find an ENTj type to make this forum big business.

---

Socionics is not for ordinary people, it is for psychology exprerts. If you wanna sell it, sell it to psychologists, who care much for education. Psychologists are mostly ENFj, and they are not trusting brand new theories, but books from 70`. It is the majority. ENFj are not logical and does not like logic. Selling socionics would be hard. The only way I can see now is online training.

---

Yup. I agree that socionics is not for ordinary people. The bulk of it is very logical so that means that it's a potential turn off for the SFs and STs. My INTP sister is interested in Socionics but my ISFP sister yawns each time I mention the word 'Socionics'. She said it's damn boring. :| She's only interested in visual identification.

I meant that all people should know a little bit of it. Socionica is a new science and all new comes from alfa. Then it goes to beta, gamma and if it's in delta, then it's as easy as MBTI ( i think). Science is a real science if it has come across from all the quadras. After all, all ideas for it's realisation need to run between quadras. Idea of a Socion means that. Asumetrical relations are that for ,btw.

You're right Pedro. :) I nearly forget that Ovcharov at the narod site is an ISTP.

You’re right Pedro to believe that there are ISTJ’s who are interested in expanding their knowledge base in Socionics for purely practical purposes in some cases. Of course, there are perhaps many other “type’s” who are initially motivated to learn about Socionics for the same reasons.

Tell me, would an ISTJ want to learn about Information metabolism purely for their love of science?

What about useless information? How do you judge what is useful verses useless for another human being? Do you have some sort of model or theory for this premise? If so I would love to see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pedro-The-Lion

My theory of life:

Nothing that is not an artificial construct can be understood. The reason is because understanding has to do with interpretation and interpretations are the forcing of observations into constructs that intentionally do not reflect a reality in order to better understand AN ASPECT of it.

I will edit this later

---

Sounds like a conscious theory of relativity. Now only if we had a conscious theory of duality.
Oh that's right.

Pedro,

My purpose in questioning you regarding a specific personality type was to help you to see that you're being impossibly arrogant. How can you stand on your pedestal and say what is useless information for another person. You went even further to say why a specific type of person would be interested in Socionics.

Your truncated sociology thesis on "Theory of Life," is a very common approach to human relations. There are no clear-cut rules when it comes to human relationships and reciprocity.

I believe that Socionics should be used as a tool and not as a script or oracle. The Universe obliges us to give humankind the benefit of the doubt in our relationships. Surely we will be the one to suffer if we fail to do so. Other humans in this world surround us they cannot be avoided.

The onus is on all of us to strengthen our weak functions. To first understand then adapt when confronted by the strengths and weaknesses of others we encounter. It would be counter intuitive to study information metabolism then proceed to become a narrow-minded propagandist.

To miss the purpose of such tireless efforts in science is a shame.

The human psyche is constructed on many layers contributed to psychosocial and biological factors. There are just too many variables to consider for stereotyping to be a valid theory in action.

Your “Theory of Life,” module sounds more like Attribution Theory. http://www.as.wvu.edu/~sbb/comm221/chapters/attrib.htm

Pedro's theory isn't so dumb. Any knowledge has to fit into our system of believings. Where do these believings come, we don't know, but everithing new has to be coded into our language of understanding the world. This means that we cut off some parts of it and we change some parts of it. Some parts we don't change, but the idea coming from one person isn't fully that same idea animore ,when we make it understandable for our selfs. Like it just happened.

Interntype relations must play their role , when one person speaks with another. Strong oppinion made by Ti is a painfull opinnion for person with weak Ti. Intuitively we understand it and that's why we speak differently with people. From early age we know that you can't speak in same way with all. Defence mechanism must develope from this knowledge that we are not understood same way by every person, spesially because we have the fourth function. From that, how well we know, that some information is painfull for us and what kind of information it is, success of our relationships comes.

Quote:

---

And I would say you have a very poor understanding of what I am saying and of reality

---

Having no knowledge of my personal abilities or professional accomplishments, I will submit to your superior Ti on this one.

Correspondingly, you had a very poor understanding of my very first post. Therefore I had to explain myself more fully hence, my last post.

It is your choice to believe me, you were not “set up,” that is juvenile.

Quote:

---

How was I being arrogant? I was stating what I saw as a probabalistic reality not saying that my view of reality was superior to that of the ISTJ in fact I was saying the opposite.

---

Your post had not 1 ounce of probability included.... like your latest post.
You seem to be convinced that you're a superior being; knowing the mind and motivations of others whom you believe to be inferior. That was the reality I perceive in your posts and wanted to address.

Quote:

---

On a side note I hate when people whore out their emotions in order to influence someone to see things from a different point of view. In my personal opinion you are a liar in word, emotion, and deed and I think you are an inferior person to me. Now THAT is arrogance! Enjoy

---

Message boards are used to communicate, enlighten and extol Pedro. Or did I not read some Theory on message board etiquette that you authored all on your own?

Maybe you should call me and we can discuss “reality,” sometime. I prefer not to use regurgitated information as some people tend to use it to define their reality as opposed to using the more natural integration process for conscious expansion and enlightenment.

Don't get me wrong, I love theory and theoretical discussions, I liken them to taking an intricate peice of machinery apart just to see how it works.

Male21 – I believe that my post explained the thoughts you shared in your post. If not I apologize for not being a superior being who is capable of communicating effectively in writing.

Pearl_80 , I'm not saing that you are dumb. But to be INTj is not easy. People at our times want to be like everibody elsse. We live at a time ,when society produces simliarity. Our age produces people who are like everibody elsse. It's that mass culture. For INTj it is not easy to be part of this all. INTj is not the kind of person who want's to be materialistic and to go with the fashion. Often INTj feels imsecure himself because he doesn't know why people want to be rich and powerfull. He doesn't understand this popularity stuff. It's unnessecery for INTJ.INTj feels himself too different from others and may become socially isolated. I don't know, what Pedro feels, but I think that he might feel himself lost into our easy going time and that nobody really interests in deeper understanding of life. I'm not surprised, if he feels himself smart and lonely cause most people don't want to reach for the truth and understanding, it's the simple conservative routine, that most of the people want.

Kaido21,

That is exactly what I was trying to get Pedro to understand. Maybe I did not communicate it in a way that he could neither understand nor appreciate.

It's interesting that you say that INTj's don't understand why people want to be powerful and materialistic. I'm an INTj, and I absolutely understand (Ti) why people want to be powerful and care more for material wealth than intellectual and spiritual wealth. Whether I like it or not is a different issue. But as an INTj, I have noticed that as I have gotten older, I have begun to become more practical about these things and to understand (much with the help of studying socionics and MBTI for the past 7 years) that everything has its value and place in society. Whether it be understanding the universe (Ti/Ne), appreciating the finer more aesthetic things in life and the emotional richness of it all (Si/Fe), using power and war to bring the world to new levels of evolution (Se/Ti), or engaging in mystical and spiritual pursuits (Ni/Fe). Putting abstract theories to work (Te, Ni), or guarding the cultural and societal status quo against negative forces (Fi/Se) and even appreciating the need to tell stories about our unique existence that are perhaps a little embellished, but nevertheless keep us looking to the past to understand where we've come from (Ne/Fi), or simply maintaining everything that people have worked so hard to achieve from falling into ruin (Te/Si) are all things that I've worked very hard to learn to appreciate, because they are all necessary to the fabric of human society.

It is most difficult when one has to look at certain values in our society propped up above others because we all have our preferences. I look at the US and I see a lot of value placed on power and success and knowledge over understanding, and it drives me crazy sometimes. But keeping in mind that everything is cyclical and that eventually those values will be replaced by new (or old) ones, and society will change again as it always has.

That is especially evident when you look at the values associated with each quadra, and realize that socionics has an even greater application in understanding why history seems to repeat itself, and how the different eras (particularly in western history, as that is what I am familiar with) generated new ideas and how those ideas evolved over time, making their way through a refining process. For reference, here are the values associated with each quadra, in case anyone is not familiar with them...

Alpha
Ne/Ti -> Si/Fe -> Ti/Ne -> Fe/Si (Ne,Ti.Si,Fe)
Beta
Fe/Ni -> Ti/Se -> Ni/Fe -> Se/Ti (Fe,Ni,Ti,Se)
Gamma
Te/Ni -> Fi/Se -> Ni/Te -> Se/Fi (Te,Ni,Fi,Se)
Delta
Ne/Fi -> Si/Te -> Fi/Ne -> Te/Si (Ne,Fi,Si,Te)

Pedro,

I'm shaking the dust off my shoes... I have moved on.

SFVB,

Your post was beautifully insightful and thought provoking.

Quote:

---

I'm an INTj, and I absolutely understand (Ti) why people want to be powerful and care more for material wealth than intellectual and spiritual wealth. Whether I like it or not is a different issue. But as an INTj, I have noticed that as I have gotten older, I have begun to become more practical about these things and to understand (much with the help of studying socionics and MBTI for the past 7 years) that everything has its value and place in society.

---

I can relate to this thought. I seem to be abetted by my willingness to embrace cultural inevitability. Socionics has truly expanded my understanding of human potential in harmony with my goal to be a progressive human being most of all. In my opinion complacent intellectualism would be far more insidious and psychologically castrating.

Quote:

---

It is most difficult when one has to look at certain values in our society propped up above others because we all have our preferences. I look at the US and I see a lot of value placed on power and success and knowledge over understanding, and it drives me crazy sometimes. But keeping in mind that everything is cyclical and that eventually those values will be replaced by new (or old) ones, and society will change again as it always has.

---

This thought has always fascinated me mainly because humankind has never learned from the mistakes and missteps of past generations. Thinking on the lines of government, there have been many types of governments installed (totalitarianism, communism etc.) None have solved the problems germane to our universal cares and concerns. Why is that?

Quote:

---

That is especially evident when you look at the values associated with each quadra, and realize that socionics has an even greater application in understanding why history seems to repeat itself, and how the different eras (particularly in western history, as that is what I am familiar with) generated new ideas and how those ideas evolved over time, making their way through a refining process. For reference, here are the values associated with each quadra, in case anyone is not familiar with them...

---

With regard to this thought I would like to do some research on this and share it with you if that is ok?

I’m thinking along the lines of - ” Present conditions are the result of previous states, abetted by some transformative force," or quadra in this case. (Regurgitated hypothesis) :wink:

If I have missed the intention and purpose of your post please correct me.

Quote:

---

SFVB,

Your post was beautifully insightful and thought provoking.

---

Thank you for your kind words.

Quote:

---

I can relate to this thought. I seem to be abetted by my willingness to embrace cultural inevitability. Socionics has truly expanded my understanding of human potential in harmony with my goal to be a progressive human being most of all. In my opinion complacent intellectualism would be far more insidious and psychologically castrating.

---

Intellectual complaceny has always, and will always be a problem. It seems to me to come from the willingness of people to latch on to poor or incomplete understanding, and create false knowledge from it. We are so often desperate for new understanding when it comes to our own existence or the physical world, that we will take even the more incomplete or ridiculous interpretation of something and spread it around like it was written in stone. History has seen this over and over again, and eventually we do find the underlying truth, but it often takes several goes at it. Physics and chemistry are great examples of this process, and we are seeing the same thing happen with psychology, which is a science in its infancy. There are many people out there who are latching on to typology (especially corporations) as a way to manage their workforces and create more efficiency, and yet most of the theories they use to do this are either completely ridiculous, or incomplete and therefore inaccurate a large percentage of the time. Socionics, in my opinion, is to psychology what the periodic table was to chemistry, and this will eventually be seen, once those psychologists and scientists with a true understanding of it formulate a concrete understanding of each function and how it plays out in people's personalities. Right now we still see too many people attempting to either over-complicate the theories behind socionics, focusing too much on details, or spreading their views about it (MBTI) before any concrete model has been developed. There also seems to be a great unwillingness among socionists to abandon additional theories like sub-types (although nevertheless fascinating), which over-complicates the theory and creates more skepticism among non-believers where there is already enough. This allows for people who are more or less con-artists to promote theories and tests that do nothing more than delay the progression of psychology as a legitimate and accepted science, and convincing much of the world to ignore psychology as a potentially useful tool in structuring some of the ways in which society is ordered.

Quote:

---

This thought has always fascinated me mainly because humankind has never learned from the mistakes and missteps of past generations.

---

We do learn from our mistakes...just very slowly. As it may take a child 100 times to learn to tie his shoe correctly over the course of a year, it takes humanity centuries to learn from its mistakes, making it seem like it keeps repeating them over and over. But there is always some sort of gradual improvement, it can just seem insignifcant in the context of so many hundreds of years.

Quote:

---

Thinking on the lines of government, there have been many types of governments installed (totalitarianism, communism etc.) None have solved the problems germane to our universal cares and concerns. Why is that?

---

Once again we're perfecting ideas that did not have enough experience and perspective to be developed perfectly at the outset. One can take the example of democracy. Jefferson, Madison, these men were scholars who understood the concept of democracy and knew western history, and they we able to create a government that avoided many of the problems faced by democratic societies in the past. However...seeing as they had relatively little to go on, they weren't able to forsee all the potential problems, and therefore created an imperfect system. Communism is another example of an idea that was not necessarily new, only it hadn't been tried on a large scale EVER, and as we saw, it failed miserably because it had NOTHING to go on historically to help avoid the pitfalls it inevitably experienced. Of course neither system is perfect, and we will probably end up trying something that's a combination of both (like socialism, although that too has many issues), but it's hard to say. I personally believe that no government will be perfect until we understand psychology well enough to implement its principles into our governing system (which is what sort of happens now, just simply with a weak understanding of human psychology and too many people in high positions who care more for power and hierarchy than perfecting the system (although they too have their place)).

Quote:

---

With regard to this thought I would like to do some research on this and share it with you if that is ok?

---

Please do. I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Quote:

---

I’m thinking along the lines of - ” Present conditions are the result of previous states, abetted by some transformative force," or quadra in this case. (Regurgitated hypothesis)

---

Yes, that's a good hypothesis to start with.

Quote:

---

If I have missed the intention and purpose of your post please correct me.

---

I don't think you missed the intention at all, although I'M not sure I had one...

Just read the two thread all the way through ...

http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...t=450&start=30
http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...?t=487&start=0

By the way, I suspect that someone in this forum has been contacting people I know. Possibly someone who does not like my V.I. website? Makes me wonder ...

How does she have a weak Fi component if she's an ENFj, which would be your beneficiary? They have an AGGRESSIVE introverted feeling component, but certainly not a weak one!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MysticSonic

How does she have a weak Fi component if she's an ENFj, which would be your beneficiary? They have an AGGRESSIVE introverted feeling component, but certainly not a weak one!

---

She could also be ESTj with the dual seeking :Ni: ...

I ment dual seeking :Fi: ...

...oh yeah. :-P

I have ceased to care what she is anymore anyways ... the last thing I need is another pushy broad to take up my time and energy when there are easier people to deal with. Whatever she is she is within my ring of benefit, and we are not the same type exactly. So, I'll just leave it at that.

sdfds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve

I haven't read everything in detail but isn't it understandable if someone gets angry that their photograph has been placed on a public forum and their personality has been analyzed based on that alone without their permission.

If had have been me in her position I may have reacted similarly (well, I probably would have used better grammar :wink:).

---

Steve, I wish you were MY grammar teacher :wink: . Maybe you should stop drinking at your computer :P .

EDIT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve

Someone has to take over from SmilingEyes while he's away

---

Wow, you kinda make it to easy, Steve.

sdfs

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve

I also think it's a bit odd that she found it in the first place so that's even more reason to be careful about being too open about your personal relationships here.

---

Someone from this forum has been contacting people I know and telling them I am talking about them. I do not know who because she will not tell me.

I think whoever it is was able to find her easily because I am very open about who I am in real life on this forum and she lived within a few blocks of where I use to live.

However, I am not too concerned; it was mostly her contacting me anyways and I really did not try to get close to her, so what ever happens is fine with me. It does not change my life any.

that last guest was me ...

lol I'm my mom's benefactor (and my dad's supervisor) and although I have never charged them.... they have given me pretty much whatever I want over the years, as long as I tell them it's a good idea and be patient with them.