vote for my type

[Jarno]

EII - galen

Galen said ILE the last time I spoke him. 2 weeks ago.

[ashlesha]

ftr i've been wavering b/w ILI and IEI if you want to put me down. its really wispy though. sometimes i wonder if there might be something to EII. i still struggle to see you as alpha, but you identify with it...

glad i could help.

[Jarno]

I think poli has a subconscious motivation for his type changing. (not in a bad way)

Different in cause, but a comparable problem that Gilly has. In Gilly's case he's not uncertain of his type, he just wants attention, hence 50 type threads. In poli's case he has a high need of newness, of not sticking with something, he needs research and not routine. This results in deliberately looking for new information which might lead to a new switch and thereby satisfying his need of newness.

Poli, you think this might be true?

[Pa3s]

In poli's case he has a high need of newness, of not sticking with something, he needs research and not routine. This results in deliberately looking for new information which might lead to a new switch and thereby satisfying his need of newness.

I can relate to that.

[ashlesha]

me 2.

i've wondered if thats behind poli's wavering or if he really is totally confused. or if he expects that there will be some kind of "aha" thing to happen where there are no worthy protests against the answer.

[Korpsy Knievel]

From reading poli's posts, pondering what motivates his frequently re-thought self-typings, and discussing music composition with him, Ne seems to be a strong producing component of his psyche. It manifests in the way he embroiders upon musical themes in search of a sense of adventure and even wonder. It's possible that he's explored darker themes but from what I've heard his creations present idyllic imagery (Si/Fi). Rolling hills of wildflowers in bloom; grazing deer and dappled shadows at play in verdant woods; the feathery, meandering nonchalance of a butterfly's flight; the evocative yet intangible rays of the setting sun. There's nothing insubstantial about his music, for it's quite complex and layered and well-realized, but it lacks any sense of heaviness or stridency. It conjures and invites more than it lectures or coerces.

In a similar vein, poli's conversational style also lacks sharp edges or jarring contrasts. I find that indicative of Si>Se. He speaks his mind without apparent hesitation and takes care to articulate his ideas in detail, and does so without pushiness or undue argument. He seeks constructive dialogue with others in a manner that suggests DS-Te, seems to open up more in small groups (Fi>Fe), and appears to value considered opinions despite always returning to pursue his original, self-directed goals (IJ temperament).

Since poli is obviously Ne-valuing in his love of novelty and in his often lateral-thinking sense of humor I've thought previously that he might be ILE. Classical composition, after all, relies on understanding and implementing the Ti-infused, structural idiom of its theory and notation. However, poli's music seems to serve his personal visions more than it does impersonal abstractions. It even produces a synaesthetic effect in me that is more painterly and organic than that of Ti-driven music, which my mind's eye simply represents in geometrical, clockwork forms. That degree of responsiveness to poli's music, even though it doesn't suit my often Se-seeking aesthetics, indicates a strong Fi component. Furthermore, poli doesn't clash with Ashton or I like the way that either of us are prone to doing with alpha NTs, which points to Fi >Ti and away from ILE.

So, unless new evidence or insight later proves me wrong, my judgment of poli's type is Ne-EII.

[silke]

not out of the ordinary, EPs and IJs can wander around different types for a while not settling down on any one and it has nothing to do with attention-whoring - they seem to have more trouble with 'boxing' themselves in, especially Ne-egos, I suppose it has to do with this sense they have that anything could be, that a lot of things are possible, their mind continues suggesting more and more possibilities that can lead them to doubt their type for a long while

[717495]

I like the description, k0rpsey. Though I also wonder if some of my musical expressions have to do with , and not . I'm not so sure what's hard to grasp about me relating to Alpha values, in any case, since I often am involved in aspects, ie. system creation, underlying structure, not only ones, and I don't really have much interest in relationship values or ethics, nor anything that's related to . I'm probably a lot more oriented by emotion, and pleasant emotions of others, a wild passion of expression in music, although not necessarily so 'involved' in the atmosphere myself. I didn't think you had to be, or that alphas had to like big, noisy, chaotic groups. I need to think of who I know does, maybe people in a church or those who go to concerts? I see a lot more relevant about alphas than that. So I think seeing the whole picture is due, instead of some little details like group orientation. We can always turn to quadra descriptions, and see just how boring gamma and delta sounds to me, and how intense beta sounds.

I didn't want anyone to rush into a typing of me without having a knowledgeable explanation of it first, and yes I've though a lot about music's relation to Socionics, and how its law can be subjective and inconsistent. I've found myself to struggle between my theoretical and logical side, and my emotional side, like previously said. I think somehow my passion that shows in my music might be representative of Fe hidden agenda, because I'm often more drawn to theory, and music is kind of a highly significant but hidden and wavering talent and thing I do, and likely composition of sweet flowing places is more a matter of taste. If anything, I could be replicating my dual and music, as a personal thing. Speculation of structure in musical ideas is also somewhat of an interest of mine, but I think that structural orientation is usually more for dominants, and not who just wants to deliver some idea or creation over anything else. But if you are pretty certain about EII, then you've voted and that's that. I just don't think EIIs would be interested in the things I am, such as heavier logical considerations, system modification, and emotional impacts >> moral credence.

Also, I'm mainly not sure why people are seeing me as . Perhaps they can clarify that before any more people vote that. I'm open to opinions, but need some actual basis in theory. If people are just confused, I don't really get it. What is there?

I think poli has a subconscious motivation for his type changing. (not in a bad way)

Different in cause, but a comparable problem that Gilly has. In Gilly's case he's not uncertain of his type, he just wants attention, hence 50 type threads. In poli's case he has a high need of newness, of not sticking with something, he needs research and not routine. This results in deliberately looking for new information which might lead to a new switch and thereby satisfying his need of newness.

Poli, you think this might be true?

This is definitely one aspect true for me, that I think is a lot stronger than most people's need here. I have a constant need for change, esp. on a theoretical or imaginative scale, which is mostly everything. Even if one typing makes sense, I'm bound to constantly rethink it, might want to implement another theory into it, adopt new perspectives. My search never seems to end, because I'm always interested by some other aspect. So in other words, my seems > . I go for the new route, instead of steadying the system. "Don Quixote takes the bird in the bush, not the one in his hand." I wonder what is so difficult for people to understand about that?

So far ILE > LII makes the most sense, based on how people are expressing and have expressed their understanding. This weighs higher than just a whole bunch of votes, which is why I'd really like some different opinions from those who vote differently. I'd also like people to come here and explain how they think ILE makes sense. I more or less hope for some kind of quantity in those thinking similarly, or else we're not doing well here in a unified understanding of Socionics. As long as we're more unified in an understanding of my type, I don't really care about other typings as much. I'm witnessing or have witnessed all kinds of contradictions in thought about my type, and this could easily have to do with the level that I chose to express myself and behave is not high enough for your estimation, but also think about ILE introversion, their reservedness in socialization, like Einstein and others who are typed INTP. Extraversion ≠ outgoingness. ≠ expressiveness.

I think siuntal also has a good stance about looking at people I'm attracted to. If I take this into consideration, which is kind of difficult for me to do personally, but it does weigh on the back of my mind significantly, then the ILE typing of enjoying SEIs makes plenty of sense as well. I am attracted to F types because I don't have what they have and want it from them, the sensitivity. But I love SEI > ESE . The former is much more light and sweet, the latter can be too overbearing or at least obvious. When -creative comes out I'm like: 'I SEE WATCHU DID THERE.' Think of how Steven Tyler makes that face, or turns his head at something he likes, but then only with SEIs. That grace person on here had music of an SEI, I could just tell, because I was immediately attracted to it. If I had to idealize someone to fit me best then it would be SEI-ish. The biggest thing about dominants is this natural down-to-earthness about really simple and beautiful things, their softness and smoothness, and with in their voice, its they like to experiment how I experiment with , makes such a sweet combination in a person ! I can act crazy around them and they're sensitive to it but accepting, and my ideas and imagination awakes in them what they need, the greatest of possibilities.

So, what say you? Are you going to challenge me, agree with me, feed my thoughts, or ignore me? I'd prefer anything but the last.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Though I also wonder if some of my musical expressions have to do with , and not .

Likewise, which is part of why I also pondered ILE.

I'm not so sure what's hard to grasp about me relating to Alpha values,

Lack of knowledge about your preferences, either because you didn't state them clearly or because I didn't read them anywhere. You also vacillate between ILE and EII often. *

in any case, since I often am involved in aspects, ie. system creation, underlying structure,

Noted as a possibility, discounted due to other considerations.

not only ones

Ne seems most prominent from my vantage and EII > ILE seemed most likely from this, largely because LII and IEE don't make much sense.

and I don't really have much interest in relationship values or ethics,

Ditto *.

nor anything that's related to .

Other than engaging in protracted discussions with Te-egos like Ashton and I and maybe some of the other IRC ne'er-do-wells.

I'm probably a lot more oriented by emotion, and pleasant emotions of others, a wild passion of expression in music, although not necessarily so 'involved' in the atmosphere myself. I didn't think you had to be, or that alphas had to like big, noisy, chaotic groups.

Stereotype. Fun for getting goats, unhelpful for typing.

So now the question is which of us will change his mind firstessest.

[717495]

Noted as a possibility, discounted due to other considerations.

I wonder what you mean. I would describe my as intense and integrative enough in my psyche, thoughts of creative systemization or theoretical law always seem to come up, and you have here a disassociation with them to adopt a new set, but it is not so much a set to be adopted than it is a new perception of things, an inspiration, that leads to a systemization. Where as for EIIs you have a rounded down sense of systematic figures replaced with an adoption of others simpler ideas, a weak sense of NT-ness, or really not much of a focus on NT thought orientation at all, none the same as someone who has certainty in his ideas, as these are also NFs. I believe myself to be NT, though I decided upon that in MBTI a while ago already. Obviously not in Socionics. But note that LII has a dedication to , and ILE likes to 'play around' with it, and maybe one day get bored of all the potential?

Ditto *.

More in emotions? Which quadra description do you like the most? Or rather you feel you relate enough to ?

So now the question is which of us will change his mind firstessest.

I will change my mind, but I invite you to do so as well

[Korpsy Knievel]

I wonder what you mean.

If you're ILE you carry yourself with a far lighter tread than others I've encountered.

I would describe my as intense and integrative enough in my psyche, thoughts of creative systemization always seem to come up, and you have here a disassociation with them to adopt a new set

Since you're essentially a disembodied series of words within this online venue, the products of your mentality are sometimes more apparent than the processes that direct their manufacture. In discussing your compositional aims and the projection of moods you spoke almost entirely in aesthetic terms. You discussed composers primarily in terms of their personalities and biographical details instead of examining the technical aspects of their oeuvres. Explicit Ti-ness was not patently visible.

But note that LII has a dedication to , and ILE likes to 'play around' with it.

LII never seemed likely.

More in emotions? Which quadra description do you like the most? Or rather you feel you relate enough to ?

My previous evaluation of your type answers these questions.

I will change my mind, but I invite you to do so as well

We'll see what we'll see.

[717495]

Since you're essentially a disembodied series of words within this online venue, the products of your mentality are sometimes more apparent than the processes that direct their manufacture. In discussing your compositional aims and the projection of moods you spoke almost entirely in aesthetic terms. You discussed composers primarily in terms of their personalities and biographical details instead of examining the technical aspects of their oeuvres. Explicit Ti-ness was not patently visible.

This seems unlike me to not regard speaking of technical aspects in music (I've commented on others on this forum, such as Galen's music). I am usually much more technical in my speech than personal. Don't you ever catch me on chatbox (when it comes to socionics-related things)? I try to speak of the technicalities, as well as aesthetics, of music all the time with people; I am not so informed or rehearsed in music theory however. So it's nothing official, but usually what I myself have discovered and rediscovered. I would think love of a boundless self-education is a reasonable approach, instead of book reading and proper education and terminology. My attempt to talk to delta NFs on chatbox fails when my theorical ideas get overrun by a 'how was your day?' story. It is in me to find something better to do then.

Though I guess we've never got to have a talk much into musical features, but you assume I'm interested in the personalities of composers? I believe I said I wanted to type them, but I show very little knowledge of little of their personalities or background. You seem to have more knowledge of this than I do, going back to our Ravel session. I only remember what I watched in school, in documentaries of a couple of them.

If you're ILE you carry yourself with a far lighter tread than others I've encountered.

I'm not sure what this means. I am not a socialite like some ILEs on here for instance. ie. timeless is an extravert, 1981slater is an extravert. I believe vero is somewhat more an introvert.

[Korpsy Knievel]

This seems unlike me to not regard speaking of technical aspects in music (I've commented on others on this forum, such as Galen's music). I am usually much more technical in my speech than personal. Don't you ever catch me on chatbox (when it comes to socionics-related things)? I try to speak of the technicalities, as well as aesthetics, of music all the time with people, I am not informed in music theory however. So it's nothing official, but usually what I myself have discovered. I would think love of a boundless self-education is a reasonable approach, instead of book reading and proper education and terminology. My attempt to talk to delta NFs on chatbox fails when my theorical ideas get overrun by a 'how was your day?' story. It is in me to find something better to do then.

Though I guess we've never got to have a talk much into musical features, but you assume I'm interested in the personalities of composers? I believe I said I wanted to type them, but I show very little knowledge of little of their personalities or background. You seem to have more knowledge of this than I do, going back to our Ravel session. I only remember what I watched in school, in documentaries.

I trust you'll sort yourself out eventually. Tally ho!

[krieger]

the thing that most strikes about polikujm is the intractability and shapelessness of his thoughts; i.e. instead of really digging down to and expressing a core unit of meaning as pertaining to reality, he just hints at things very superficially, phenomenologically, and skips on to the next thing. this is what i look for in IP types.

(i need to add this caveat every time i use the word superficial in relation to Pi: focusing on superficial, phenomenological forms in a direct way establishes an implication to states in reality that ranges into infinite depth. hence it is in another sense actually a thing of extreme depth. when i say "superficial" i mean simply the technical determination that Pi, in its most direct, immediate activity, evaluates phenomenological content, not some petty "insult" as to the worth or use of Pi functions)

[woofwoofl]

I mentioned somewhere I had a friend who struck me as Extraverted /, but the T and the F were unclear... this seems like one of those cases again, but a bit different... your N is like a fog of possibilities... I'm not seeing a path, like I do with people...

You made this thread, you seem more calm/relaxing than the ILEs I know (which points me to Delta), and hey, everyone can T if they want to! I can think (sometimes )...

Anyways, I'll go with you being a shy IEE

[717495]

You made this thread, you seem more calm/relaxing than the ILEs I know (which points me to Delta), and hey, everyone can T if they want to! I can think (sometimes )...

What's actually interesting about that thread is no one agreed with me about that being what does In fact, I think 'personal relationship' is the wrong word choice being used (since I am rather sure I've wronged in thinking I am knowledgeable of relationships), and more has to do with a light and non-serious alpha orientation with people. My directedness toward types. I apologize for the confusion, like I said, was familiar when you called ILE 'all over the place.'

Anyways, I'll go with you being a shy IEE

Noooooooo!!! Doom me!

[woofwoofl]

What's actually interesting about that thread is no one agreed with me about that being what does In fact, I think 'personal relationship' is the wrong word choice being used, and more has to do with a non-serious alpha orientation with people. My directedness toward types.

I've always thought of as bonds between people, something with a type of structure, like the cathedral of logic (which I'm apparently excommunicated from ) that I envision to be like (but without all of those right-angles and all)... and it would make sense for our outlooks to be similar if we both have (and for that matter) in the same place... and hey, you said you were a bit feeling odd with the chatbox - same here! It feels like a big crazy word-orgy to me I'm bad at them...

Noooooooo!!! Doom me!

Come on over to the sanctuary of Delta and take a load off (I've got too much to be in there)! here's a song that feels really Delta-ish to me you may like:

[717495]

I've always thought of as bonds between people, something with a type of structure, like the cathedral of logic (which I'm apparently excommunicated from ) that I envision to be like (but without all of those right-angles and all)... and it would make sense for our outlooks to be similar if we both have (and for that matter) in the same place... and hey, you said you were a bit feeling odd with the chatbox - same here! It feels like a big crazy word-orgy to me I'm bad at them...

Not entirely sure how valid Socionically all this is In another thread you spoke of more to the point and how it does not apply to me.

I do think, like others in that thread, that I was not referring a whole lot to , and maybe just the idea that people should be more light, accepting and not so judgmental as a method of ideal relations, something I see a lot more in other alphas, but it also has its specific references that I can't pinpoint exactly, since it was a while ago. It could be taken multiple ways.

the thing that most strikes about polikujm is the intractability and shapelessness of his thoughts; i.e. instead of really digging down to and expressing a core unit of meaning as pertaining to reality, he just hints at things very superficially, phenomenologically, and skips on to the next thing. this is what i look for in IP types.

(i need to add this caveat every time i use the word superficial in relation to Pi: focusing on superficial, phenomenological forms in a direct way establishes an implication to states in reality that ranges into infinite depth. hence it is in another sense actually a thing of extreme depth. when i say "superficial" i mean simply the technical determination that Pi, in its most direct, immediate activity, evaluates phenomenological content, not some petty "insult" as to the worth or use of Pi functions)

That is interesting that you don't apply this to both intuitions, since it's what intuition is classified as. Structural essence perception in how you describe, on the other hand, is much more of a -oriented, though not necessarily -independent, frame of thought, and something that weighs on my mind secondarily to intuition. I even think of bolt, in his often intense typing explanations, to similarly do what you say I do in my more theoretically involved posts. Though I see bolt as more specialized in a way, as though he's had more time to develop that part of himself, and perhaps take it more seriously and assuredly than I see in a lot of ILEs. I earlier made the association, based on people I type, that the creative function is typically a lot more generalized and lightly referenced, and the dominant function likes to explore further in its details.

However I appreciate this explanation and will look into the themes construing due to my interest in (and because its something sort of fresh I have not yet pondered), yet don't see it sticking to something directly influential to Socionics, like or .

[Pa3s]

Noooooooo!!! Doom me!

I'll put you high on my priority list, bro.

[Absurd]

In light of, what's the word ? Oh yea, crushing evidence and polikujm wanting to be ILE, then whispering this to my ear after unthinkable tortures he had to endure, he's ILE.

I know it's two words.

[717495]

I love to make adventures. Grab a snow cone and follow me! Whoohoohoohoo

[Lotus]

Ok, maybe make a list of who thinks I'm what type, would be helpful for me to keep track of different opinions going round. Off the top of my head I can think of when I last asked them

ILE - 07490, borderline, Jarno, siuntal, eunice, azeroffs, deante, strrrng
ILI - probably more people, but most of these people are more likely to waver their weak guess (because I'm noting again I relate well to alpha). i will fill it in when i have more info, but I think solid opinions off the top of my head are from: niffweed17, trevor, aixelsyd
EII - ashton, galen, tom

Then if you have an opinion of my type I forgot about, give it, or help me out, and I'll add it to my understanding of this stuff. Thanks, everyone and anyone.

don't take me too seriously. it was more of a whim vote, not anything i'm confident or even remotely sure about. just a guess, i like voting on things.

[woofwoofl]

Not entirely sure how valid Socionically all this is In another thread you spoke of more to the point and how it does not apply to me.

I do think, like others in that thread, that I was not referring a whole lot to , and maybe just the idea that people should be more light, accepting and not so judgmental as a method of ideal relations, something I see a lot more in other alphas, but it also has its specific references that I can't pinpoint exactly, since it was a while ago. It could be taken multiple ways.

What you posted here in the chatlogs I like a lot I can connect with it lots:

poli - "theyre just static noise. which is where my sister is different, she can pick up on all sorts of emotions"

poli - "things have to kind of resonate with me or"

This has to be valuing over valuing! it's okay to value , I do it too, and trying to interpret F via T a lot can be bewildering

poli - "i think i got off to like, manipulating relationships or something. i dont remember where it was fun"

Creative , creative ! from Wikisocion:

Wikisocion - "The individual is very adept at perceiving, establishing, and maintaining personal bonds between people. However, these bonds are often perceived as being situational and flexible rather than static. The individual is inclined to focus on establishing personal bonds with other people in the context of realizing or following perceptions from his base function.

The person easily creates a sense of closeness and kinship between people by expressing like and acceptance, but these sentiments are situational rather than an expression of permanent feelings. If the person's mood or external situation changes, he or she may "turn off" the feelings instantly, even forgetting whom they had created the feeling of kinship with."

And as far as the "wackiness" is concerned, it's mainly a thing of going berzerk, and you sure do seem to love - you got it all over the place in this thread! I agree with k0rpsey in you being more low-key than most ILEs too...

[717495]

People talk more about me being INTp, since all you voted for it! And it's here too!

Or else you will DIE!


Labgoat has some weird explanation of it I don't understand, so maybe you can put it in clearer terms.

don't take me too seriously. it was more of a whim vote, not anything i'm confident or even remotely sure about. just a guess, i like voting on things.

poo

[ashlesha]

i don't have a good reason for thinking you're any type and i don't have any solid grasp at all on what type you are so as for the ILI/IEI thing...jfaf. i just want to say something, anything maybe because i'm curious what your type is too and because you ask a lot, idk lol. so unless i say i'm positive it might be better for your confusion/frustration levels to ignore me.

some stream of consciousness style nonsense because i feel like talking, feel free to totally dismiss----

- you're so open-ended and slippery, like you present a lot of info without coming to a stop/conclusion or whatever. idk what this is. P>J or just not Ji? intuition? i just notice it but i don't know what it is.
- i can see where you might seem logical but i think you're more attuned to the emotional, uh, stuff than you might indicate (or think?) the more i think about it the more i think this is more your focus than, uh, logical type stuff.
- i feel like i should talk about quadra values. i have no idea. boo. i sort of think not delta but yknow whatever not in "notinmyquadra" kind of way cos <3
- um the top three things put together would point to IEI?

don't b mad pls

[woofwoofl]

People talk more about me being INTp, since all you voted for it! And it's here too!

Or else you will DIE!


Labgoat has some weird explanation of it I don't understand, so maybe you can put it in clearer terms.



poo

...and yep, there it is - the valuing over valuing! from Wikisocion:

Wikisocion - "Types that value naturally question the consistency of beliefs that are taken for granted in everyday life. They strongly prefer to make decisions based on their own experience and judgement, as opposed to relying on external authorities for knowledge, which they use only as a last resort. They also have respect for people with clearly defined and internally consistent opinions, believing that a sense of internal certainty is necessary for orienting oneself in life. To these types, one's personal standards of truth are more reliable than public consensus."

That post (and much of this whole thread/issue) has legendary, borderline woofwoofl levels of over , Sir Polls-A-Lot

And hey - you even capped it all off with your brand of that I find both funny and endearing instead of bewildering! awwww...

[717495]

Damn.

Ok I'm gonna make another thread about people who think theyre in my quadra or not. Statistics FTW!

I personally believe I'm NT, N>T, but probably just as feeling-based too, especially lately. Just not really ethics based at all. I think I have a stronger attachment to logic > ethics.

your brand of that I find both funny and endearing instead of bewildering! awwww...

Not feeling the personal connection, but thanks for the information and feedback. That helps a little bit, as far as > goes.

i don't have a good reason for thinking you're any type and i don't have any solid grasp at all on what type you are so as for the ILI/IEI thing...jfaf. i just want to say something, anything maybe because i'm curious what your type is too and because you ask a lot, idk lol. so unless i say i'm positive it might be better for your confusion/frustration levels to ignore me.

some stream of consciousness style nonsense because i feel like talking, feel free to totally dismiss----

- you're so open-ended and slippery, like you present a lot of info without coming to a stop/conclusion or whatever. idk what this is. P>J or just not Ji? intuition? i just notice it but i don't know what it is.
- i can see where you might seem logical but i think you're more attuned to the emotional, uh, stuff than you might indicate (or think?) the more i think about it the more i think this is more your focus than, uh, logical type stuff.
- i feel like i should talk about quadra values. i have no idea. boo. i sort of think not delta but yknow whatever not in "notinmyquadra" kind of way cos <3
- um the top three things put together would point to IEI?

don't b mad pls

I appreciate the feedback.

[woofwoofl]

Not feeling the personal connection, but thanks for the information. That helps a little bit, as far as > goes.

No problem I'd also point to your wanting to make yet another poll as... legend... wait for it... dary! - amounts of valuing over valuing (I might have to give up my crown ), and I literally had one of the best laughs I had in a long time, because this build-the-data-pile-to-the-sky approach exactly the way I go about things when I get stuck!

I know I might be driving you nuts, but oh, what the hell here's Wikisocion on as a mobilizing function!

Wikisocion - "The individual is keen on accumulating factual knowledge on subjects of personal interest and those that help him be more efficient and productive, but he's often unsure of his ability to find and select the correct information and is therefore attracted to people whom he sees as competent in that area and reassure him."

Sounds a lot like the new poll's quadra-filtering and the dislike you stated for "half-ass random answers"


Once again, I don't mean to "roar roar " at you and all, but everything is just screaming IEE to me...

[717495]

I can dig. Though fyi when I was speaking of relationship manipulation, that question was what I looked for or like about other people, not something I actually do. There are other things I like about people, such as the creative I spoke of about SEIs. I doubt I'm PoLR or an extroverted ethical type, simply because my strong theoretical orientation and never related at all to people of the type or what they talk about. It's just a kind of far-fetched typing, as far as I know. ILE is easier to understand because of their often non-social orientation, and creative- , that theme very much describes me. If I were IEE, I would need to be a lot more relationship and ethics oriented, and like I said I believed I am more -PoLR than -PoLR. I may come across as soft in demeanor, and such, but I doubt its the same as ego.

But I do know I can be pretty random and imaginative, and am wondering if some people are mistaking that for , when all those others are voting for me as , and may not be that type-related. I don't know, need more information about that.

There's a lot of white boxes in this post, reminds me of concrete. Also, there's another type poll under my signature.

[woofwoofl]

I can dig. Though fyi when I was speaking of relationship manipulation, that question was what I looked for or like about other people, not something I actually do. There are other things I like about people, such as the creative I spoke of about SEIs. I doubt I'm PoLR or an extroverted ethical type, simply because my strong theoretical orientation and never related at all to people of the type or what they talk about. It's just a kind of far-fetched typing, as far as I know. ILE is easier to understand because of their often non-social orientation, and creative- , that theme very much describes me. If I were IEE, I would need to be a lot more relationship and ethics oriented, and like I said I believed I am more -PoLR than -PoLR. I may come across as soft in demeanor, and such, but I doubt its the same as ego.

But I do know I can be pretty random and imaginative, and am wondering if some people are mistaking that for , when all those others are voting for me as , and may not be that type-related. I don't know, need more information about that.

There's a lot of white boxes in this post, reminds me of concrete. Also, there's another type poll under my signature.

you just can't get enough of that , can you? and you filtered the info again! I hope it's as impossible for me to drive you nuts as it is impossible for you to drive me nuts (I know I'm posting lots) once again, I call to the stands - the Wikisocion!

Wikisocion - "The mobilizing function is also called the hidden agenda function. Help in this element is appreciated, but past a certain point is seen as excessive. The subject is more comfortable using this function than the suggestive function but still can only use it sporadically. If he isn't careful and directs it at an individual who does not value it, he will likely meet a harsh response, since they are almost sure to see it as a puerile gesture (more so than when he uses the suggestive function, usage of which comes off as more mature and well-considered, since he takes it more seriously in the first place). The subject's innate lack of balance in the mobilizing function can easily cause him to indulge in it recklessly or to sorely neglect it. It is best used in support of the suggestive function.

If too much of this element is ambient, the person will get bored or even become repelled. He sees it as a necessary part of good living, but not a primary life goal."

If you were ILE or LII, don't you think some of that you have would have stomped on my ? It never did

And also, what would drive an ILI to ever have a "beat the dead horse" icon with Gamma being implied as the horse (a very boring horse too )?

[silke]

I'm starting to wonder what an ILE/IEE with defunct creative IE would be like.

I've read some of your past post poli and I really can't pick up on yours. Seems like you use very very little of it. Though I do think ILE fits you better over IEE but it's like you're running on Ne-Fe all the time. May be that is why some posters who have been on this forum longer than me are saying that you're not really putting your own personality across. Would also explain why you sometimes make such wild connections.

Sorry if I have offended you by anything I've stated above, this isn't meant as criticism. I'm just trying to analyze some of your past posts.

[717495]

@ suintal: Hmm, not sure. Kind of a vague question

@ woof: Nah, I'm pretty sure I'm always like this with researching and collecting data, though my theory and system creating tendencies are usually higher... obviously not in a deep LII way

If you were ILE or LII, don't you think some of that you have would have stomped on my ? It never did

-PoLR

[krieger]

one of the reasons for voting INTp was that polikujm had been typing himself as INTp for quite a long time before he went into this crazy type shifting routine. as a general policy, i stop taking a person's self-typings seriously when they start doing this latter thing.

[Absurd]

one of the reasons for voting INTp was that polikujm had been typing himself as INTp for quite a long time before he went into this crazy type shifting routine. as a general policy, i stop taking a person's self-typings seriously when they start doing this latter thing.

I think he had something bad for breakfast, like a pinecone, give him some time and everything will come back to normal

[woofwoofl]

-PoLR

Story of my life anyways, here's some of that data kinda stuff you were (maybe, probably) looking for, I went ahead and made a graph of it all!



Going by quadra alone, this would put you in Delta! and the dots don't fall on any line intersections because I have to divide by √(2), which is around 1.4142, which would, if you're going with line intersections in a vertical (x,y) manner, put the 5 Alpha votes at (0.0000, 3.5355), the 1 Beta vote at (0.7071, 0.0000), the 8 Gamma votes at (0.0000, -5.6569), and the 6 Delta votes at (-4.2426, 0.0000), leaving you with coordinates at (-1.7678, -1.0607), right in the Delta quadra

[717495]

Hmm, well actually, if you go by the full data from every of my threads, these are the total number of votes:

ALPHA 36
BETA 6
GAMMA 25
DELTA 11

Seeing as though the majority was for NT, this is why Alpha and Gamma are so high. Mostly ILI, ILE and LII votes.

If you attempted a cross cancelation as a faulty attempt to 'average' this data, you would have Alpha at a difference of +11 and Delta at a difference of + 5, then factoring the weight of "NT" votes, Alpha NT would be that much more stressed.

Or I could just count the total number of votes for each type, and go with the one that's the highest. Hmm, let me see.

ILE 24
LII 14
ILI 22

ILE and ILI are almost tied. I think this bottom set of statistics are somewhat more informative.

[717495]

Though, I've looked through the celebrity benchmark thread this past couple of days, and of those main agreed upon benchmarks was able to look at who I related to the most. I will tell you, it was no Alpha NT type, who had little similarity to me. But it was actually the IEI famous people, and I did see some kind of consistency in how each type acts, and I've read Filatova's book for a while and the IEI profile fits me the best. So it's really a matter of interpretation, and why others might see me as too odd for their own type, I don't know is really type-related.

I enjoyed the Beta form of conversation, it is not so factual with random laughs based on a flow of content, but rather the expression is weaved into the words, every word has a richer meaning and conversation is cited slower to capture this essence, and can be interpreted differently based on tone. I also liked the ESEs. The ILEs were boldy expressive in a kind of awkward way, and kind of quick and jumpy with their thoughts, and the LIIs were way too dry and calculating for me. I guess that aspect of weirdness is not related. I think the Delta STs came across the hardest to understand. The ILIs had very little awareness of emotional content and were too factual with more enigmatic judgments. Some of the IEIs were almost exactly like I'd expect myself to act or word things, or I liked their personality and their other Beta counterparts. I found the ILIs and ESEs to be pretty cool too. This estimation of choosing a type based on celebs is not biased on my behalf.

[silke]

cool, welcome to beta then

[DividedsGhost]

It's Poli; Hi Policat.

[neko]

lie