Elena

[Ezra]

Perhaps nobody cares? As in, they still think you are EIE but have better things to do?

LIS.

In Ezra's case, his type was not clear. He just seemed to be a Beta extrovert. It's easy to see why some people may have suggested that he was EIE at first.

And to me, it's still not clear.

But if I notice that the discussion is going nowhere - because the other person seems to be bent on "winning" the discussion, no matter how - then I see it as a waste of my time and go "whatever". If others see it as "not having an answer" or "losing" or whatever, what do I care?

See, I don't know who you can value Se with this view.

[Mea]

See, I don't know who you can value Se with this view.

Haha. That's just being smart.

[Expat]

See, I don't know who you can value Se with this view.

Hmmmm -- perhaps because I value Te and Ni even more? I value not wasting my time in discussions that are pointless and will bring no benefit whatsoever?

[anndelise]

That Elena refers to people questioning her type as "accusers"

That stood out to me as well. It made it sound like it's about who's right (rather than what's right), but I was uncertain and the other stuff I said seemed more significant. I guess I figured her tone speaks for itself.

there are other interpretations of "accusers" and "accusations"

if i tell you that you are not what you say you are, then I could be suggesting that either you don't know what you are....or that you are lying about what you are...(or other)

in this particular thread (and another involving elena and fdg), there have been accusations that elena was only on here to defend fdg's type, and there have been ....suggestions/accusations.... that elena is lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things, I'm sure

when someone is accused of lying...or even if it's merely a "suggestion" that they are lying... then it has already turned from "what" to "who".

when people feel as if they are being accused of lying, then they have the option to withdraw, defend, or fight back. elena doesn't seem much of the withdrawing kind when it's being suggested that she's lying. which leaves defending and/or fighting back.

which leaves us to where this thread is at now
multiple parties making accusations forcing another party to withdraw, defend, or fight back
and multiple parties (including elena and expat both) making "parting shots" before attempting to withdraw


and yes, this post can be interpreted as both an accusation
as well as a suggestion of how this matter has reached the point it reached

[Expat]

the socionix forum seems to disproporortionately discuss economics more than we do. and yet the consensus seems to be that they are disproportionately more beta.

"Economics" can be discussed in Alpha, Beta, Gamma or Delta frameworks, like any other subject.

[Joy]

the socionix forum seems to disproporortionately discuss economics more than we do. and yet the consensus seems to be that they are disproportionately more beta.

Makes sense to me.

There's a big difference between business and economics. There's also a big difference between business and finance.

This is only my personal opinion, and it's not one that I've put an enormous amount of thought into, but I tend to see a large focus on finance and economics as being Beta > Gamma.

[Expat]

Se is bloced with an ethical function in gamma. the thinking function is bloced with an intuitive function. so using Se to "win" debates over a thinking subject - typing someone based on forum posts - would strike me as a more Beta.

Yeah, good point.

Gamma is more about forceful viewpoints over issues of ethics and relationships.

[Expat]

if i tell you that you are not what you say you are, then I could be suggesting that either you don't know what you are....or that you are lying about what you are...(or other)

Well, all I mean to tell is that "you" are clueless about socionics. About that, I make no apologies whatsoever.

that elena is lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things, I'm sure

Not "lying" - mistaken. I was mistaken about my own knowledge of socionics as late as one year ago. In a few secondary things, much more recently.

and multiple parties (including elena and expat both) making "parting shots" before attempting to withdraw

Yeah I can be bitchy sometimes, can't I?

[Joy]

there are other interpretations of "accusers" and "accusations"

if i tell you that you are not what you say you are, then I could be suggesting that either you don't know what you are....or that you are lying about what you are...(or other)

Calling someone a liar is an accusation. Telling them that they don't understand something as well as they think they do is a criticism, not an accusation.

in this particular thread (and another involving elena and fdg), there have been accusations that elena was only on here to defend fdg's type

Only? Who said that?

I can see how this could be taken as an accusation. It's not what she was referring to in that post though.

and there have been ....suggestions/accusations.... that elena is lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things, I'm sure

when someone is accused of lying...or even if it's merely a "suggestion" that they are lying... then it has already turned from "what" to "who".

when people feel as if they are being accused of lying, then they have the option to withdraw, defend, or fight back. elena doesn't seem much of the withdrawing kind when it's being suggested that she's lying. which leaves defending and/or fighting back.

Not sure who accused her of lying, but I personally don't think she's lying or doing anything else that's unethical, so the term "accusation" (which to me implies blame or guilt for a wrongdoing) doesn't really fit the situation.

which leaves us to where this thread is at now
multiple parties making accusations forcing another party to withdraw, defend, or fight back
and multiple parties (including elena and expat both) making "parting shots" before attempting to withdraw

I don't see it like this, personally, and I doubt Expat does, either. I can't speak for anyone other than myself though.

and yes, this post can be interpreted as both an accusation
as well as a suggestion of how this matter has reached the point it reached

It's based on false premises though.

[anndelise]

Yeah I can be bitchy sometimes, can't I?

of course

[Joy]

my point was that someone might have motivations for pursuing the study of a framework, different from the integral type of the framework itself.

yeah... which is one of the reasons why I don't think what was said is applicable to Elana's type

[Expat]

I don't see it like this, personally, and I doubt Expat does, either. I can't speak for anyone other than myself though.

You are right, but I've been inclined to go "whatever" very often recently.

[Joy]

yeah

[anndelise]

at your response, but i'll only respond to one part

and there have been ....suggestions/accusations.... that elena is lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things, I'm sure

Not sure who accused her of lying, [...]

surely you're not denying that in this thread and the fdg thread that there weren't suggestions made by one or more forum members that elena was lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things . . . nor that it wasn't even suggested that she had an ulterior motive for even coming onto the forum in the first place (despite her statement of why she came onto the forum)

[Expat]

elena was lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics,

I've often been in situations like this:

Someone will say something like, "I am fluent in English, I have studied it for quite some time".

Yet when the person actually writes in English, very obvious errors are clear. And I may say, "your English is not that good".

Does it mean that the person was "lying" about their knowledge of English?

[snegledmaca]

I've often been in situations like this:

Someone will say something like, "I am fluent in English, I have studied it for quite some time".

Yet when the person actually writes in English, very obvious errors are clear. And I may say, "your English is not that good".

Does it mean that the person was "lying" about their knowledge of English?

*dropping in like a paratrooper* Yes! In fact, I'd say very much so.

[Joy]

surely you're not denying that in this thread and the fdg thread that there weren't suggestions made by one or more forum members that elena was lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things . . .

I don't know if others suggested she lied or not. Like I said though, I do not think she's lying. I do think she's incorrect, but that's very different from lying.

So for the record, I do not nor have I ever suspected her of deception.

nor that it wasn't even suggested that she had an ulterior motive for even coming onto the forum in the first place (despite her statement of why she came onto the forum)

I imagine she came here because it sounded interesting or sounded like fun. (What I had said about FDG was more a reflection on what I perceive his motivation for inviting her to be, not her motivation for accepting the invitation.)

[Joy]

*dropping in like a paratrooper* Yes! In fact, I'd say very much so.

Even if that person genuinely believed him/herself to be fluent in English?

[anndelise]

I've often been in situations like this:

Someone will say something like, "I am fluent in English, I have studied it for quite some time".

Yet when the person actually writes in English, very obvious errors are clear. And I may say, "your English is not that good".

Does it mean that the person was "lying" about their knowledge of English?

irrelevant

Do you deny that people can interpret suggestions of "wrong"ness as being suggestions of "lying" (regardless of the intentions of the speaker)?

[Expat]

*dropping in like a paratrooper* Yes! In fact, I'd say very much so.

What if the person is simply overestimating their own knowledge of English, and sincerely believes to be already "fluent"? Perhaps the person has a broader definition of what "fluent" means?

[Joy]

irrelevant

Do you deny that people can interpret suggestions of "wrong"ness as being suggestions of "lying" (regardless of the intentions of the speaker)?

I'm sure they can and do. Regardless, I have a very difficult time believing that anyone here honestly believes that Elena knows herself to be EIE yet says that she is not. I also have a very difficult time believing that Elena thought that anyone was accusing her of saying that she is not EIE when she knows that she actually is.

[Expat]

Do you deny that people can interpret suggestions of "wrong"ness as being suggestions of "lying" (regardless of the intentions of the speaker)?

How could I "deny" that people can see things in this absurd way you are suggesting?

So, whenever I tell a worker whom I am training, "sorry, you think you have got it right but you have not, let me start again", you think he's entitled to say "are you calling me a liar"?

[snegledmaca]

Even if that person genuinely believed him/herself to be fluent in English?

What if the person is simply overestimating their own knowledge of English, and sincerely believes to be already "fluent"? Perhaps the person has a broader definition of what "fluent" means?

Yes. Whether they believe their delusions to be reality or not there is a way to determine what is real and what isn't. If they refuse to do that, then they are effectively lying if they are incorrect because they do not care whether they really are telling the truth, they merely believe they are.

EDIT: The difference in context can be corrected if noticed. And again, if the person rejects alignment they are accountable for the consequences of such a choice.

[Joy]

How could I "deny" that people can see things in this absurd way you are suggesting?

That's what I thought at first as well, but unfortunately, I do think that this happens a fair amount. I don't know how we could possibly be responsible for this though?

Actually, now that I think about it, it makes sense that some people start out with "I'm not calling you a liar" or something of the like when they're telling you that they believe you're incorrect about something. This never made sense to me before. I guess now it sort of does.

I'm also better able to understand why some people here have called me a liar or said that I'm deceptive. They were saying that I was purposely giving misinformation or consciously trying to deceive people. They were saying that they believed I was incorrect. (I still have a very difficult time understanding how differences in opinions could be called deception.)

So, whenever I tell a worker whom I am training, "sorry, you think you have got it right but you have not, let me start again", you think he's entitled to say "are you calling me a liar"?

However, perhaps if you were not abundantly friendly in the way you said it he might think that you're accusing him of purposely doing it wrong? Or purposely not trying to get it right?

[anndelise]

Do you deny that people can interpret suggestions of "wrong"ness as being suggestions of "lying" (regardless of the intentions of the speaker)?

How could I "deny" that people can see things in this absurd way you are suggesting?

i'm not going to play these games with you, expat
tossing in evaluative comments such as this, as well as giving those two irrelevant examples suggest that you have no interest in actually understanding anything I wrote in that first post.... nor do you seem interested in understanding anything I've tried to point out since

you seem stuck on being defensive about anything I write, while throwing in pot-shots like "absurd way you are suggesting"
you also seem pretty stuck on coming out as a "winner" when i hadn't even started any kind of contest, offering insight doesn't make anything a contest, nor a debate
it is my fault for allowing you to turn this into a seemingly debate/contest, i had thought you were actually trying to understand me. my bad.

[snegledmaca]

Carefully ann, somebody might start attributing motivation on your part that you are attributing motivations on the part of others and before you know it you end up being an entirely different type...

EDIT: *coughwon'tsaywhichonebutIthinkyouwhichoneImeancou gh*

[Elena]

there are other interpretations of "accusers" and "accusations"

if i tell you that you are not what you say you are, then I could be suggesting that either you don't know what you are....or that you are lying about what you are...(or other)

in this particular thread (and another involving elena and fdg), there have been accusations that elena was only on here to defend fdg's type, and there have been ....suggestions/accusations.... that elena is lying about her own type and/or her own knowledge of socionics, among other things, I'm sure

when someone is accused of lying...or even if it's merely a "suggestion" that they are lying... then it has already turned from "what" to "who".

when people feel as if they are being accused of lying, then they have the option to withdraw, defend, or fight back. elena doesn't seem much of the withdrawing kind when it's being suggested that she's lying. which leaves defending and/or fighting back.

which leaves us to where this thread is at now
multiple parties making accusations forcing another party to withdraw, defend, or fight back
and multiple parties (including elena and expat both) making "parting shots" before attempting to withdraw


and yes, this post can be interpreted as both an accusation
as well as a suggestion of how this matter has reached the point it reached

You are exactly correct in all of that, thanks for explaining it better than I could have.

Joy and Expat: Accusations are all I see happening here, so how else would you expect me to respond? The both of you make assertions about my inner motives assuming falsely that you have some kind of insight into me THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE. I tell you that you are wrong about what you've claimed of my motives, but you still persist on not even seeming to listen? This is senseless.

[Elena]

Makes sense to me.

There's a big difference between business and economics. There's also a big difference between business and finance.

You really don't know what you're talking about. Business, economics, and finance are all interdependent on one another and contend with the same reality. The only real difference is that they utilize different procedures and deal with some different details. Beyond that, to pretend there is a big difference is pure absurdity.

This is only my personal opinion, and it's not one that I've put an enormous amount of thought into, but I tend to see a large focus on finance and economics as being Beta > Gamma.

Go put more thought into it before you say things like that. What you're saying is just a nonsense stereotype.

[Joy]

You really don't know what you're talking about.

lol

Business, economics, and finance are all interdependent on one another and contend with the same reality. The only real difference is that they utilize different procedures and deal with some different details.

obviously

Beyond that, to pretend there is a big difference is pure absurdity.

lol

Go put more thought into it before you say things like that. What you're saying is just a nonsense stereotype.

lol

[Joy]

Anyways Elena, I'm not interested in arguing with you. To do so would be completely pointless.

[Elena]

Yes, I can see you are thinking very strenuously Joy. Keep it up!

[snegledmaca]

Anyways Elena, I'm not interested in arguing with you. To do so would be completely pointless.

You know... somebody might actually say the opposite. I don't remember ever you having a discussion with somebody who you disagreed on a core issue.

[Elena]

Anyways Elena, I'm not interested in arguing with you. To do so would be completely pointless.

So don't make accusations about matters you have no understanding of and there will be no need to argue.

[Joy]

You know... somebody might actually say the opposite. I don't remember ever you having a discussion with somebody who you disagreed on a core issue.

What's the core issue here?

So don't make accusations about matters you have no understanding of and there will be no need to argue.

Need? Define need. Define accusation as well, because I don't recall making any accusations about you today.

[Elena]

You know... somebody might actually say the opposite. I don't remember ever you having a discussion with somebody who you disagreed on a core issue.

So far she seems to only argue whenever it suits her to make some point in agreement with Expat and then she evades when there is nothing else for her to stand on. I don't think she has any ability to argue from her own perspective.

[Elena]

Need? Define need. Define accusation as well, because I don't recall making any accusations about you today.

Now you're trying to use semantic evasiveness, lol. How transparent.

The words "need" and "accusation" have already been defined enough. If you need more help, use a dictionary?

[snegledmaca]

What's the core issue here?

That elena is LIE. Can you accept that?

So far she seems to only argue whenever it suits her to make some point in agreement with Expat and then she evades when there is nothing else for her to stand on. I don't think she has any ability to argue from her own perspective.

My impression is the bolded part, which is often manifested by her in the form of "We will simply have to agree to disagree". This makes me think she has very poor and to be honest the reason I simply cannot see her as a LIE. However she says that it's because she doesn't care to argue so I guess that is also a possibility.

[Expat]

you seem stuck on being defensive about anything I write,

You call it "being defensive", I call it "finding it tiresome". Let's move on.

you also seem pretty stuck on coming out as a "winner" when i hadn't even started any kind of contest,

I saw no contest -- I was, at all times, saying exactly what I think.

[Minde]

Elena... ?

Regardless of your inner motivations... I'm sorry to say but you're coming across as rather unpleasant and arrogant and condescending and quite close-minded.

I mean, if you don't care about that then, well, pay no attention to me and sorry to have intruded. But on the off-chance that you do have at least a little bit of interest in things like that, I thought I'd interject my so-far-non-participatory observation.

...ok, that's all.

[Joy]

Now you're trying to use semantic evasiveness, lol. How transparent.

Actually, I was politely pointing out the differences in our perspectives. I see no "need" to argue anything. And I have not made any accusations of you today.

So far she seems to only argue whenever it suits her to make some point in agreement with Expat and then she evades when there is nothing else for her to stand on. I don't think she has any ability to argue from her own perspective.

I'll post my opinions on things you say whenever I'd like. You may respond or not respond to me whenever you'd like. If you do respond, I may respond or not respond to you whenever I'd like. You may also post your opinions on things I say whenever you'd like, and I may respond or not respond to you whenever I'd like. You may respond or not respond to my response whenever you'd like. See how it works?