If +Ni is expressed in the id function then it is clearly unvalued. I have no qualms with that statement, as it would support what I said earlier about valuing -Ni over +Ni.
Gulenko who designed this system, believes that +Ne and -Ni are expressed together as a single function. -Ne and +Ni, etc. +Ne and +Ni would never support each other and would be anti-complimentary.
He also believes that the 7th function is as much of a PoLR as the 4th, in that the person almost completely ignores input from it. If +Ni is in the ILEs id, then an ILE would have little use for it.