not the hottest I've ever seen....8.5/10, imo....probably ESxP
Thinking the same. But I bet you're just using MBTT. Maybe I'm wrong. But you reckon she's Se leading, ja?
Show me the hottest.
You should take out the second pic... all the other ones I'd agree that she's fairly attractive. The second pic though, with the leopard... whatever that is... is not very good looking at all. Like, a Halloween costume or something... If that's the case... then I'll retract my previous statement.![]()
She looks like someone who would irritate me. And she doesn't look very.... ummm... deep.![]()
Now I see these pictures again I realise that she is not actually that hot. I actually think the model that hitta posted is hotter, even without all her make up and digitalised body parts and shit. In real life this girl is kind of going down in my opinion because I haven't bothered talking to her in my life, ever. She's part of a crowd I scoff at, and I can't be arsed. Also, I get that feeling you get when you're around a hot girl every day, and you just get bored of looking at them all the time. Oh well, I'm sure I'll find another super hot girl to admire soon.
imfd95, often you make intelligent comments, but the above is plain shite. That is all.
ETA: I just went back and looked at hitta's thread, and eurgh, outside the trailer in black - her left leg is like a fucking stick. Not good. Not attractive.
dudes, ezra's got feelings.
i know what you mean, i think. i know a girl like that girl, in fact i know several, and i categorize them all by the original girls' name. call em 'kirby's. it's lingo that my friends understand.
asd
+1000000 to imfd95
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
I simply keep them well concealed.
We too have a lingo for a variety of people in society. But I have my own private categorisation for women. I pay far more attention to a woman's complexion than I do to her structure, so I have 'types of face'.i know what you mean, i think. i know a girl like that girl, in fact i know several, and i categorize them all by the original girls' name. call em 'kirby's. it's lingo that my friends understand.
I like the phrase "modern classic".
It's not designed to be.
I completely agree.Maybe what is "plain shite" is the perception of ENTj's being propogated here as someone resolves their idenity crisis. Weisband writes,
[...]
Amazingly, we have gone from that to this:
[...]
Essentially, I think the rationale behind what you were originally saying about Joy was based on nothing but pure foundationless speculation. That's a diplomatic way of saying what I said to you earlier; that which apparently insulted you.
Last edited by Ezra; 03-16-2008 at 12:54 AM. Reason: to add a word and change some bad HTML
What you mean is the distinction between how Si manifests itself in an LIE and how it manifests itself in an EIE, yeah?
So you think emeye is an LIE, and Joy is a pitiful wannabe?Her attitude towards wealth accumulation appears glib at times. For example,
[...]
(contrast with)
[...]
Perhaps you should start a thread on which type you are depending on what self-development resources you use. Your popularity would dramatically increase or decrease; at this time, I cannot say which.Glib might also characterize her choice of self development resources (Steve Pavlina and now this Russell Rowe.)
Link me to the thread where Joy presents the argument that it is plausible that she is an SEI.Combine with her considering ENTj's conflictor for herself. (That is to say, both diametrically different quadra and club.)
Until you further develop what you've said, I find it a weak and implausible argument that Joy is not an LIE.Behind whatever initial speculation, I think there is a noticeable trend here to be realized, given (but not limited to) the above elaborations.
Is ultimately shit, yes. You can't be an LIE unless you like alpinism and tourism. I'm sure many LIEs do like alpinism and/or tourism, but I'm also sure there are many LIEs who don't. I like tourism. Other types will like alpinism. This doesn't mean we're LIEs. It doesn't mean we're not LIEs either. It's inanely specific; too so to actually provide any evidence for a type. I think most with sense on this forum agree, even Expat and Joy.The Weisband description?
Ezra, you're not well informed, you've not been here for enough time, and probably you lack some intellectual capacity to defend your argumentations against imfd's, and perhaps you don't understand half of what he's saying. Please do not make yourself look so much like a fool.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
On Joy and SEI, I don't think it's fair to throw that at her (and I've done it in the past). It was a time when the knowledge of socionics here was even more "scattered", and she was just too quick to say "this is my type" when she was still considering the available evidence. She'd be the first to acknowledge that she didn't know what she was talking about at the time.
On Weisband's descriptions: we talked about that with Igor Weisband personally. Those were the very first attempt at a full set of socionics descriptions, and a few of the things he wrote - like the alpinist thing, or the very black-and-white remark on abortion - were based on supposed LIEs he knew, and he was trying to make sense of it, without yet fully understanding what was functional-related or not, and to which extent.
![]()
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
But why then do others assume that when all the people here have claimed that "this is my type" that they, unlike Joy, are not considering the available evidence, but leaping to conclusions? If Joy was indeed doing what you described, then I too have been doing this since I came here; I've based my conclusions on all I know. I know, from experience, that this may be subject to change, since new information will be gained. Thus, my 'conclusion' may change. Does this mean I'm impulsive? No. Irrational? No. It means I'm taking the most rational and methodical route towards discovering my type. Considering it based on all possible sources of information. Same goes for others. Like snegledmaca, for example.
Originally Posted by Joy
well they are only pictures of her partying
SEE Unknown Subtype
6w7 sx/so
[21:29] hitta: idealism is just the gap between the thought of death
[21:29] hitta: and not dying
.
It's not that. (Perhaps she just reminds me of people I've known.)
No, I don't think it's good-looking either, but it gives a breadth of character.Originally Posted by cracka
Yeah but Joy, this is not about being deep or anything more than a shell. It's the fact that she's hot that counts. She's essentially there for a man. She serves no other purpose in the world.Originally Posted by Joy
yeah, the second pic looks like some ugly hooker.
I think ESXp as well. She seems kind of formidible. She's not smiling in any of those pictures and looks mostly drunk to her veins.
ha, well at least you're honest. She looks different in every picture though. I'm going to go with the others and say E**P.Originally Posted by Ezra
If you like her so much go get her. Not really my type.
Posts I wrote in the past contain less nuance.
If you're in this forum to learn something, be careful. Lots of misplaced toxicity.
~an extraverted consciousness is unable to believe in invisible forces.
~a certain mysterious power that may prove terribly fascinating to the extraverted man, for it touches his unconscious.
I can't keep track of who is who either.
It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.-Mark Twain
You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.
Oh, I thought she was the one in the middle in the third pic, but now I can't tell, lol.
Me neither heh, hard to type when you can't tell which one is the wonderbeauty![]()
INFp
If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)
.
Ja doch, Se leading works for me too, agree with ESXp. Do you have any pics of her sober?![]()
INFp
If your sea chart does not match reality, go with reality (Old mariner saying)
do you have any pics of her naked?![]()
IEI - the nasty kind...
I was talking to Ezra about this earlier via IM and I pointed out that she looks SO much like any other girl that I cannot tell which one she is when she is posing with other girls.Originally Posted by Baby
![]()
It's because they're all the same person. Give them a few years, there's a good chance of recovery.Originally Posted by Slacker Mom
She looks cute, but she is not the most attractive girl I have ever seen in my life.
Red stripe??? in a CAN?! Loser.
"Those who make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities..."
- Voltaire
In that first picture she looks EXACTLY like my ESTp roomate's ex-gf, who was ESFj.
INFp-Ni
looks ENFj to me.
Natalie Imbruglia is hotter.
Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit
She looks ridiculous in the second picture.
Not sure about her type. Perhaps ENFj is a good guess.
![]()
, LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
Originally Posted by implied
EIE was my first thought. IEI was my second. Then others were seeing Se, and I was like "fuck it, I don't care" and didn't post any guesses.Originally Posted by Expat
an ESI posing like this? guess again.
![]()
I think rationalOriginally Posted by Joy
, then if not ESI, LSI.
but could be SLE as well.
I'm not saying she's not Se (I don't know or care), but she's not ESI. And I don't see anything that would suggest she's IJ over any of the other temperaments. Seems unlikely.