Socionics Type Assistant scores

Creepy-Jack London · 01-08-2006, 11:21 AM

Post your scores here. IMO this is the most reliable and valid test out there.

http://www.socionicstypeassistant.com/stc/sta.html?3:Xa@mD}@sQdINsZ2ttuVUjFnwLfVFgrnZOsZjdo1 :jTcYvlUtPRbIyDM{KLzP@iNpIZmHvir_ESSHOI_i:

**nobrainer** · 01-08-2006, 11:16 PM

We all know that already what's new.

Creepy-Jack London · 01-09-2006, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We all know that already what's new.

What's new is that all you losers should be using it instead of the other crap stuff I've seen here.

**Zeia** · 01-09-2006, 07:20 PM

That "crap" typed me correctly while the socionics type assistant typed me incorrectly.

Creepy-pokeball · 01-09-2006, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by Jack London

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We all know that already what's new.

What's new is that all you losers should be using it instead of the other crap stuff I've seen here.

Making shoulds for us is so cute

**Eidos** · 01-09-2006, 07:28 PM

Originally Posted by Zeia

That "crap" typed me correctly while the socionics type assistant typed me incorrectly.

I think it just typed who you wanted to be, not who you actually were.

**Eidos** · 01-09-2006, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by Jadae

Originally Posted by Jack London

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We all know that already what's new.

What's new is that all you losers should be using it instead of the other crap stuff I've seen here.

Making shoulds for us is so cute

Yes, you need direction

Creepy-pokeball · 01-09-2006, 07:44 PM

Hi Eidos and no thanks.

**Zeia** · 01-09-2006, 07:46 PM

Originally Posted by Eidos

Originally Posted by Zeia

That "crap" typed me correctly while the socionics type assistant typed me incorrectly.

I think it just typed who you wanted to be, not who you actually were.

Then logically tell me what I actually am, if you want to say that please back it up.

**FDG** · 01-09-2006, 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by Jack London

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We all know that already what's new.

What's new is that all you losers should be using it instead of the other crap stuff I've seen here.

I agree on the fact that the 333 stuff is crap, but keep that all you losers line for yourself.

Socionics type assistant is very good. What I don't like of it is how he associates inductive reasoning to sensing. Crap.

**Catholic Schoolboy** · 01-09-2006, 08:04 PM

It works for me. But... I don't have the link anymore. It's long lost. McNews test works for me too, after you screw around with it.

**Eidos** · 01-09-2006, 08:10 PM

Gee, it sure takes a bit of

to get you guys going

FDG, no offense meant, dude... just wanted to get a reaction.

**FDG** · 01-09-2006, 08:13 PM

Ahhaa, no, I wasn't really offended, at least for no more than 0.3 seconds.

**Eidos** · 01-09-2006, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by FDG

Ahhaa, no, I wasn't really offended, at least for no more than 0.3 seconds.

OK then :wink:

Creepy-Diana · 01-09-2006, 08:23 PM

.

**Angel von Himmel** · 01-09-2006, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by FDG

Originally Posted by Jack London

Originally Posted by Anonymous

We all know that already what's new.

What's new is that all you losers should be using it instead of the other crap stuff I've seen here.

I agree on the fact that the 333 stuff is crap, but keep that all you losers line for yourself.

Socionics type assistant is very good. What I don't like of it is how he associates inductive reasoning to sensing. Crap.

Typology test are essentially what you make out of them ...if you manipulate the results in a direction you know will be a certain type, that is crap. On the other hand, if you get pissed at a typology test because you do not know enough about the theory behind it to begin with, that is also crap.

But, the honest question is why should you really be relying much on typology test to begin with if you atttitude is that it will give you an easy answer without doing any real research into the theory behind it? I agree, sounds more to me like a person with that sort of attitude is wasting his or her time.

And the only diffrences between the test that Sergei Ganin made and the one I made is that you need to know more than the basics of socionics to understand the results, and I also have made research into doing detection for the hidden agenda and suggestive function. So, other than the fact that Ganin's test is prone to error in result of those functions the end results are the same.

**nobrainer** · 01-09-2006, 10:17 PM

Tests work best when you have no or very little idea what you gonna get at the end (you still have to be honest though). Once you know how it works, then as rmc said, you begin consciously or subconsciously manipulate the result. Testing over and over again IMO waste of time. Trying to validate some new test by taking it knowing well your type and how it all works will validate nothing. Pretending that you are a noob and don't really know anything about the whole thing while validating a new test is even worse.