FDG's type one more round

[UDP]

For a while FDG and I seemed to butt heads in certain areas - when I was new to the forum.

[Expat]

Yeah, the only people I could feel myself supervising in this forum are Phaedrus and Joy

As a general remark, I think every supervision is different -- an ESTp supervising an INTj is a totally different interaction than an INTj supervising an ENFp, etc.

[anndelise]

I question whether we're talking supervision....or butting heads.
Not every time someone butts head is it a supervisory thing.
Nor a conflictor thing, nor a.....etc etc.

[FDG]

UDP: you were being extremely unrealistic in your analysis of what constitutes a road to leadership, basically forgetting all the political aspects ( parts, maybe? ).

Now, the only part of yourself I would not tolerate is all the little rules you make, but it's fair.

[Ezra]

FDG, is there any reason why you're not sticking with ESTp?

We seem remarkably similar. And the Joy supervision I can relate to.

[implied]

it's surprising to me how many people relate to FDG (in a good way, i mean!)


why did no one pick the ENFj option? aside from how you seem to like ISTps pretty well etc.

[Exodus]

Yeah, the only people I could feel myself supervising in this forum are Phaedrus and Joy

As a general remark, I think every supervision is different -- an ESTp supervising an INTj is a totally different interaction than an INTj supervising an ENFp, etc.

yeah, I was thinking that maybe because the environment is so heavily that the aspects don't show as much.

[Ezra]

I think that's why many people have quite a big problem with me. My Se arrived like a nuke in London.

[FDG]

FDG, is there any reason why you're not sticking with ESTp?

We seem remarkably similar. And the Joy supervision I can relate to.

You take yourself waaay more seriously than I do, sweetie

Let me take a look at the erotic attitudes in the new wikisocion, since I have some time to waste!

* prone to initial doubts about intensity of own interest in another person
* not always confident about revealing that interest
* inclined to focus on whether or not the other person might reciprocate the interest
* inclined to question whether or not the other person's interest will remain constant with time
* preference for partners that provoke in the individual a certain sense of awe in terms of power, physical presence, and the like
* appreciation for the sense of power-play present when interacting with such partners, with acceptance of a slight sense of superiority on the part of the partner, without ever actually "submitting" to them
* this takes the form of the individual somewhat expecting the partner to be "mean" on occasion
* in the case of Victim males with female partners, this latter trait assumes a characteristic analogous to a "knight devoted to his princess"
* inclination to openly admit to a relationship having been ended by the partner rather than by the individual himself

Victim behaviour. No to the first, no to the second, no to the third (im pushy), yes to the fourth (of course), i don't know about the fourth, but i get disguested by people that show off their power and the like, in regard to the fifth i want an equal relationship and nobody should feel superior, when others are mean i just think they are mean and ill accumulate every complain in order to release all of them in one go and utterly destroy the other person's self esteem, yes to the knight stuff, and i don't care about the last, i usually let people think that everything has faded away with time, as it usually happens

* no doubts about own interest in another person
* not prone to hesitation about whether or not to reveal that interest
* focus is more on own interest than whether or not the other person might reciprocate
* romantic interaction is more about "toughness" than "tenderness"
* needs to feel some sense of "superiority" over the partner, but worthwhile only if the partner is seen as able to largely "keep up"
* this takes the form of power games, which others might regard as cruel or bitchy
* in the case of female Aggressors with male partners, the above tends to assume the characteristic of a woman expecting total devotion from the partner, rather than her being "bossy"
* little inclination to externally admit not having been the one to end a relationship, unless if adopting a "who cares" front simultaneously

of course to the first, of course to the second, of course to the third, of course to the fourth, uggghh to the fifth - i dont want power plays in a relationship - same thing for the sixth - and i don't really know about the last

lets see about the polrs

Individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function tend to be negligent to the effects of and have the view that Image:symbol_s.gif aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if you don't have to deal with them particularly, and of your own physical sensations.

A lack of concern for small aesthetic details is more visible in the LIE; in the case of the EIE, the low focus on is more noticeable as a dislike for low-level practical details, such as filling up forms, signing documents, or filling tax returns.

Due to individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function believing that Si aspects are of less importance, they tend to be thrown off course by unthought of, new or neglected introverted sensing matters.

mmmmmm

The individual has difficulty evaluating interpersonal relationships between himself and others, and between other individuals, beyond those based on achieving mutual goals, including mutual amusement. Little importance is given on evaluating the inner feelings or emotional state of other individuals, which are seen as irrelevant or assumed to be non-existent, if not reflected on clear external actions and emotional expressions. Therefore the individual dismisses the notion of others looking for those factors in himself. Statements by other persons reflecting their inner feelings are not really registered by the individual if not accompanied by external emotional expression or actions. Suggestions that the individual may have acted unethically in the eyes of another person who, however, has not expressed disapproval obviously or immediately, are met with bafflement by the individual.

I have never cared about this.

The individual longs for close personal relationships where personal and private experiences can be shared easily in an atmosphere of mutual trust, sustained by shared sentiments and ethical beliefs that make external expression of emotions unnecessary. The individual is inclined to take first steps, but he is not confident of his ability to correctly evaluate the existence or status of such a relationship and therefore is attracted to persons who value clear and unambiguous personal relationships with others and who follow a clear set of ethical principles, which gives them credibility and makes them deserving of trust in the individual's eyes.

The individual tends not to consider whether people are friends or enemies or whether they feel good will or ill will towards them. Instead, he or she usually acts right from the start as if the other person were a friend or an enemy based on their prior knowledge of what the person does. This makes it possible to mistake a friend for an enemy and vice versa. Only gradually does the individual come to recognize what feelings others have for him, and there is always an element of doubt unless others express those feelings verbally and unambiguously and act in a way that clearly matches their stated feelings, over a sufficient period of time. The individual is easily made insecure about the status of personal relationships and needs frequent reassurance that the other person's feelings have not changed.

The individual is sheepish about expressing his personal feelings about people ("I find you really interesting" or "I like you a lot"), but responds very well to these statements, as if they were unexpected treats. Instead, the person tends to focus on whether others' behavior makes sense or not.

This is a lot more me.

The individual feels at home among people who are actively doing something and interacting with each other directly (visibly), and is able to organize people, move them around as necessary, and guide them in achieving a specific goal.

He is keenly aware of territorial conflicts and confrontational behavior occurring around him. He very quickly becomes confrontational when others try to make him move or get him to do something in an aggressive or confrontational way. He quickly recognizes when people are trying to get each other to do something or are trying to organize him for some purpose. He also spontaneously uses aggression to achieve his own goals.

He wants to make all decisions himself about what he will do, wear, eat, look like, etc., and resents any attempts by others to make these decisions for him. However, he is willing to make use of other peoples' ideas, advice, and creativity, as long as he plays the most visible role.

He enjoys testing his will in challenging situations and views life as a sort of obstacle course, full of adversity and challenges, that must be weathered and conquered.

Are there people that don't see like this? That don't see the confrontations? That don't want to decide for themselves? The only part I don't agree with is the usage of aggression for achieving goals.

[ThePeddler]

I think that's why many people have quite a big problem with me. My Se arrived like a nuke in London.

...there's a difference between extremely bad socials skills and , just throwing that out there... ESxp's are usually adored if they're not insecure...

[Expat]

...there's a difference between extremely bad socials skills and , just throwing that out there... ESxp's are usually adored if they're not insecure...

You seem to be making the assumption that "bad social skills" = "insecurity", which I totally disagree with -- in Ezra's case I don't think it's insecurity at all, it's an extreme lack of awareness of the effect his words and demeanor may have on others, which he's fine with except if it may prevent him from getting what he wants (most often here, information or explanations). His natural mode of operation is "tell me what I need to know. Now", but on occasion he is reminded that he can't actually force anyone here to do his bidding, when he goes a bit too far and people comment on that, so he goes "oops, I have to be careful not to piss these people off too much" and backs off. Typical behavior of ESTp in need of INFp help.

[Expat]

Individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function tend to be negligent to the effects of and have the view that Image:symbol_s.gif aspects are of less importance than others for achieving their goals. They put a low priority on the physical, short-distance, here-and-now in relation to longer-distance and longer-term considerations. A typical manifestation is a lack of concern for small aesthetic details, since a greater focus is given on the opinion that, in the longer term, taking care of them is a never-ending exercise. This is also manifested in a relative lack of awareness of the immediate surroundings, as in noticing where objects may be if you don't have to deal with them particularly, and of your own physical sensations.

A lack of concern for small aesthetic details is more visible in the LIE; in the case of the EIE, the low focus on is more noticeable as a dislike for low-level practical details, such as filling up forms, signing documents, or filling tax returns.

Due to individuals who possess introverted sensing as a 4th function believing that Si aspects are of less importance, they tend to be thrown off course by unthought of, new or neglected introverted sensing matters.

mmmmmm

Please consider if you relate to the quote as a whole, in spirit, not just to the isolated bit on documents etc

[FDG]

I do lose track of objects if I don't have to use them right now, but not of my sensations - the two things are pretty different imho.

I think aestethics is important only when I'm doing something where aestethics plays a role. If I'm drawing clothes, of course it's important. If I'm writing an exam, it's useless (and this sometimes has reduced my grades, with some teachers)

[Ezra]

...there's a difference between extremely bad socials skills and , just throwing that out there... ESxp's are usually adored if they're not insecure...

You seem to be making the assumption that "bad social skills" = "insecurity", which I totally disagree with -- in Ezra's case I don't think it's insecurity at all, it's an extreme lack of awareness of the effect his words and demeanor may have on others, which he's fine with except if it may prevent him from getting what he wants (most often here, information or explanations). His natural mode of operation is "tell me what I need to know. Now", but on occasion he is reminded that he can't actually force anyone here to do his bidding, when he goes a bit too far and people comment on that, so he goes "oops, I have to be careful not to piss these people off too much" and backs off. Typical behavior of ESTp in need of INFp help.

Correct, Expat. ThePeddler, you are incorrect.

I used to think my people skills were good. I've only just put two and two together. While I have confidence in my abilities, a lot of this confidence is either blind or irrational in the traditional meaning of the word. It is the curse of the 8; not being able to find a balance between strength and gentleness. That's what integration and awareness is there for. It's something I'm beginning currently.

[Ezra]

I do lose track of objects if I don't have to use them right now, but not of my sensations - the two things are pretty different imho.

I think aestethics is important only when I'm doing something where aestethics plays a role. If I'm drawing clothes, of course it's important. If I'm writing an exam, it's useless (and this sometimes has reduced my grades, with some teachers)

So, clearly aesthetics do play a role in exams.

Incorrect grammar frustrates me. FDG, you're on the whole quite good with grammar, and so I'm surprised when you start writing in all lower case one day, and then switch back, or the like. You normally miss full stops though.

[FDG]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

[Slacker]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Particularly when for a good number of people here, English is a second language. It's my first language and I still can't be bothered to follow grammar rules just so Ezra isn't frustrated.

[Expat]

It's my first language and I still can't be bothered to follow grammar rules just so Ezra isn't frustrated.

A glimpse of ENFp wickedness.

[FDG]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Particularly when for a good number of people here, English is a second language. It's my first language and I still can't be bothered to follow grammar rules just so Ezra isn't frustrated.

id say can we try not to follow them even more so that he gets much more frustrated? that sounds fun

[Mea]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Particularly when for a good number of people here, English is a second language. It's my first language and I still can't be bothered to follow grammar rules just so Ezra isn't frustrated.

id say can we try not to follow them even more so that he gets much more frustrated? that sounds fun

yupyup. i agree. too tru

[Ezra]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Firstly, because of what SM said. Secondly, because it is our duty as English-speakers to maintain a well-constructed and effective language that doesn't change every year because people can't be bothered to observe rules, and in not doing so, make it even more irregular and illogical than it already is. It's to do with understanding, and maintaining this understanding so that all who try to understand can understand.

[FDG]

lol this is my thread i ken even piss on it if i want, ya know?

[Ezra]

It'll by no means annoy me. My own grammar is what matters to me, and if people are too ignorant to follow procedure, then it's their loss, and they're also accountable for the losses of anyone else who attempts to understand the rules of the English language.

[Slacker]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Firstly, because of what SM said. Secondly, because it is our duty as English-speakers to maintain a well-constructed and effective language that doesn't change every year because people can't be bothered to observe rules, and in not doing so, make it even more irregular and illogical than it already is. It's to do with understanding, and maintaining this understanding so that all who try to understand can understand.

AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHH

OK I studied English in school (Uni to you) and I have the following opinion: The only purpose of language is to communicate. So long as you communicate - that is so long as what you say is understood - whether you follow rules doesn't matter one bit. In fact, I think having your own personal voice is more important than grammar rules. Who cares if the damn language gets more irregular and illogical? And how do you know that it might not become more logical instead of less? This following rules for the sake of the rules shit bugs me no end.

[FDG]

It'll by no means annoy me. My own grammar is what matters to me, and if people are too ignorant to follow procedure, then it's their loss, and they're also accountable for the losses of anyone else who attempts to understand the rules of the English language.

lol go live in the 18th century and marry an old victorian virgin with a chastity belt

anyway, ezra, i work as a fukkin translator, so i ovviusly know when i have to use ze right grammar, and when not

its very nice that youre trying to teach stuff to a woman which has a degree in english and to a guy that works with the language, lol, while you still play with pokémon cards with you friends (dont worry - i play with them, too)

[Slacker]

Is wanting to follow rules simply for the sake of the rules a thing or a thing or a combination?

[Ezra]

lol this is my thread i ken even piss on it if i want, ya know?

Yes, you're free to do as you please with this thread.

[Ezra]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Firstly, because of what SM said. Secondly, because it is our duty as English-speakers to maintain a well-constructed and effective language that doesn't change every year because people can't be bothered to observe rules, and in not doing so, make it even more irregular and illogical than it already is. It's to do with understanding, and maintaining this understanding so that all who try to understand can understand.

AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHH

OK I studied English in school (Uni to you) and I have the following opinion: The only purpose of language is to communicate. So long as you communicate - that is so long as what you say is understood - whether you follow rules doesn't matter one bit. In fact, I think having your own personal voice is more important than grammar rules. Who cares if the damn language gets more irregular and illogical? And how do you know that it might not become more logical instead of less? This following rules for the sake of the rules shit bugs me no end.

Yes, and if communication online requires perfect grammar, then so be it. Besides, you've just contradicted yourself.

[Slacker]

Communication online doesn't require perfect grammar, and I don't give a rat's ass if I contradicted myself.

[FDG]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Firstly, because of what SM said. Secondly, because it is our duty as English-speakers to maintain a well-constructed and effective language that doesn't change every year because people can't be bothered to observe rules, and in not doing so, make it even more irregular and illogical than it already is. It's to do with understanding, and maintaining this understanding so that all who try to understand can understand.

AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGHHH

OK I studied English in school (Uni to you) and I have the following opinion: The only purpose of language is to communicate. So long as you communicate - that is so long as what you say is understood - whether you follow rules doesn't matter one bit. In fact, I think having your own personal voice is more important than grammar rules. Who cares if the damn language gets more irregular and illogical? And how do you know that it might not become more logical instead of less? This following rules for the sake of the rules shit bugs me no end.

Yes, and if communication online requires perfect grammar, then so be it.

Given that you are able to understand us without our grammar being perfect, you have just contradicted yourself.

[Ezra]

lol go live in the 18th century and marry an old victorian virgin with a chastity belt

I think you've got the wrong idea, FDG. I'm not a prude. I'm systematic, and I like good grammar, because I'm an aesthete.

anyway, ezra, i work as a fukkin translator, so i ovviusly know when i have to use ze right grammar, and when not

its very nice that youre trying to teach stuff to a woman which has a degree in english and to a guy that works with the language, lol, while you still play with pokémon cards with you friends (dont worry - i play with them, too)

Yeah, a friend and I made a few recently. It became a bit of a phenomenon - people going "where'd you get that from!?? That's well good!!! I want one!". I'd post them, but I don't have them on the laptop. They're quality.

One more thing. I don't regard the old "we have a degree and you are young" argument as in any way effective.

[Mea]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Firstly, because of what SM said. Secondly, because it is our duty as English-speakers to maintain a well-constructed and effective language that doesn't change every year because people can't be bothered to observe rules, and in not doing so, make it even more irregular and illogical than it already is. It's to do with understanding, and maintaining this understanding so that all who try to understand can understand.

Seriously. Worry about stuff more important for a change. Stop letting these teeny problems bug you.
I swear you'll have an early death.

[Slacker]

I think you've got the wrong idea, FDG. I'm not a prude. I'm systematic, and I like good grammar, because I'm an aesthete.

Oh for fuck's sake, do you even know what "aesthete" means? It's someone who likes things that are beautiful, not someone who likes things that follow rules. If you loved beautiful language that is beautiful simply in sound or tone, you would be an aesthete. From what you've said, you like language that follows rules regardless of how beautiful it is. And no, following rules does not equal beauty.

[Ezra]

i don't get what's the point of correct grammar on an internet forum

Firstly, because of what SM said. Secondly, because it is our duty as English-speakers to maintain a well-constructed and effective language that doesn't change every year because people can't be bothered to observe rules, and in not doing so, make it even more irregular and illogical than it already is. It's to do with understanding, and maintaining this understanding so that all who try to understand can understand.

Seriously. Worry about stuff more important for a change. Stop letting these teeny problems bug you.
I swear you'll have an early death.

You reckon I'm having heart palpitations and serious rise in blood pressure over this? No, arguing is my lifeforce. It keeps me calm and composed. It leads to things. It makes things interesting.

[Ezra]

I think you've got the wrong idea, FDG. I'm not a prude. I'm systematic, and I like good grammar, because I'm an aesthete.

Oh for fuck's sake, do you even know what "aesthete" means? It's someone who likes things that are beautiful, not someone who likes things that follow rules. If you loved beautiful language that is beautiful simply in sound or tone, you would be an aesthete. From what you've said, you like language that follows rules regardless of how beautiful it is. And no, following rules does not equal beauty.

Thank you for confirming a position that I already hold. Beautifully put, too.

[anndelise]

I think you've got the wrong idea, FDG. I'm not a prude. I'm systematic, and I like good grammar, because I'm an aesthete.

Oh for fuck's sake, do you even know what "aesthete" means? It's someone who likes things that are beautiful, not someone who likes things that follow rules. If you loved beautiful language that is beautiful simply in sound or tone, you would be an aesthete. From what you've said, you like language that follows rules regardless of how beautiful it is. And no, following rules does not equal beauty.

hmmm,.... it might be,... to an istj :wink:

[Gilly]

The product of following rules can be beautiful

[ScarlettLux]

Yeah, I think proper grammar, etc. is beautiful too. Even though I can make a lot of mistakes, I try. =D

[Kim]

The product of following rules can be beautiful

The product of not following them can be equally beautiful.

[Gilly]

Truth.