Quote Originally Posted by wym123
Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg
Quote Originally Posted by Markus
INTjs would make for awesome leaders of a company, if all of the employees of that company were robots.
Why else do you think we're interested in robots?

I don't see how Bill Gates can't be an INTJ. An evil INTJ, perhaps, but there are evil ones out there.... Now Steve Ballmer, HE'S the ENTJ of the pair.

Bill Gates even dresses like an INTJ. He has the pose, he has the detatchment from reality, and he has the desire to remake the world. He is also apt to spend long periods of time in seculsion... very long periods.

He also seems more independent of his environment than an ENTJ. Where the ENTJ is focused more on relaying information between his environment and himself, the INTJ prefers to restrict the flow of that information. Besides, who better to fit the archetype of the "mastermind" than Bill Gates?
From what I hear, I think most Socionicists would disagree with you that Bill Gates is an INTj. But anyway, let's assume that he is for the sake of this discussion. What is so "evil" about Bill Gates?
I said he was evil, that's my subjective appraisal. For one thing, he's on Bush's side (that means he's in opposition to me), and he has done his very best to sideline developments on the internet that I would have liked to have seen taken place. Even apart from my own disagreements, however, he was a part of the strategy to deliberately create differences (FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt)) between his IE product's implementation of the HTML standard and Netscape's. This created a very significant waste of energy for some two years as developers ended up having to research ways to get around the descripencies. This was more than a simple divergence of product evolution: it was a coherent, explicit strategy designed to psychology bend the market against the idea of having two dominant browsers at once. When you try to manipulate vast amounts of people psychologically without their realizing it, then what you are doing is plainly evil. And yes, that which is unethical, is evil.

Let me just make clear what he did: HE USED HIS COMPANY'S POSITION ON AN INTERNATION STANDARDS COMMUNITY TO DELIBERATELY DILLUTE THE STANDARDS IT PROPOSED. He acted in his own interests against the good of the many. That qualifies any man for the label of evil.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halloween_Documents

And yes, standing by while others commit wrongs when you can stop them is just as evil as doing the wrongs yourself.