Hydrangea's socionics type

[Gilly]

hkkmr i hope you don't really intend to use wikisocion as a credible source for socionics info. Most of that was written by niffweed; compare to most of the sources we might site that are from Russian practicioners who teach Socionics in schools or have been certified in some form or another.

[mu4]

hkkmr i hope you don't really intend to use wikisocion as a credible source for socionics info. Most of that was written by niffweed; compare to most of the sources we might site that are from Russian practicioners who teach Socionics in schools or have been certified in some form or another.

There are significant portions that were written by Rick and other contributors.

There are large sections of wikisocion that has significant problems, but there is plenty of good content. It's not like niffweed is stupid, most of his problems relate to his lack of socialization and inadequate understanding of people and isn't a reflection of his understanding of the theoretical background on socionics.

He's more then capable of paraphrasing and interpreting original articles accurately.

Taks something from Rick's site about the ego.
http://www.socionics.us/practice/ego.shtml

It's written of course in Rick's voice but the essence is similar.

I have a lot of problems with niffweed and he has a lot of problems with me, but he can also offer something valuable.

I use the wiki because it's centralized resource, I would recommend disregarding all the type descriptions because that's really the weakest link since most users probably have not experience all types unlike a practitioner who may meet and interact with hundreds and thousands of people over time.

[Gilly]

hkkmr i hope you don't really intend to use wikisocion as a credible source for socionics info. Most of that was written by niffweed; compare to most of the sources we might site that are from Russian practicioners who teach Socionics in schools or have been certified in some form or another.

There are significant portions that were written by Rick and other contributors.

The rest is more than enough to discredit it as a reputable source.

There are large sections of wikisocion that has significant problems, but there is plenty of good content. It's not like niffweed is stupid, most of his problems relate to his lack of socialization and inadequate understanding of people and isn't a reflection of his understanding of the theoretical background on socionics.

He's more then capable of paraphrasing and interpreting original articles accurately.

Taks something from Rick's site about the ego.
http://www.socionics.us/practice/ego.shtml

It's written of course in Rick's voice but the essence is similar.

I have a lot of problems with niffweed and he has a lot of problems with me, but he can also offer something valuable.

Ok but paraphrasing just makes him a dolt and also leaves lots of room for embellishment of his own personal interpretations, which have proven to deviate from more standard interpretations pretty regularly IMO. Typing someone like discojoe as IEI, for example, is pretty fucking hilarious.

I use the wiki because it's centralized resource, I would recommend disregarding all the type descriptions because that's really the weakest link since most users probably have not experience all types unlike a practitioner who may meet and interact with hundreds and thousands of people over time.

Centralized resource? What does that even mean? Everyone looks at it? It's on your Firefox quick links bar? Please.

[mu4]

The rest is more than enough to discredit it as a reputable source.

Ok but paraphrasing just makes him a dolt and also leaves lots of room for embellishment of his own personal interpretations, which have proven to deviate from more standard interpretations pretty regularly IMO. Typing someone like discojoe as IEI, for example, is pretty fucking hilarious.

Centralized resource? What does that even mean? Everyone looks at it? It's on your Firefox quick links bar? Please.

Some people are confident parsing thru various sources for good material, other people aren't. I'm pretty confident I can find the decent material in all that dirt. Also always willing to go Russian or somewhere else for additional sources.

[Gilly]

How could he be trusted to sort the wheat from the chaff if he can't be trusted to write the descriptions of his own accord? Built-in bullshit sensor? Not likely.

[Reuben]

I wonder how it feels like when 2 highly intelligent men are arguing over my type as if their egos are at stake.

[Gilly]

It would only be a good thing if they bothered to actually use their intelligence instead of their capacity to generate pages of gratuitous cockwaving and undeniable bullshit.

[717495]

Egos are always at stake.

[Creepy-female]

Egos are always at stake.

That's DEEP.

[Reuben]

That's DEEP.

Poli, looks like someone is thumbing up your donkey.

[Creepy-female]

Poli, looks like someone is thumbing up your donkey.

Stop being a twat.

[Nico1e]

By the way, Hydrangea, I will try working on your type soon.

And also, Korpsey isn't an ILI, he might be a SLE, but I'm not sure yet. Working on it.

(*edit. No, I think I agree with SEE. And, sigh, this was one of those random and irrelevant interruptions to the thread, sorry about that.*)

[Nico1e]

That is the reason why there have been some misunderstandings.

[Reuben]

Stop being a twat.

@N1cole

You sure he isn't in gamma?

[Absurd]

And also, Korpsey isn't an ILI, he might be a SLE, but I'm not sure yet. Working on it.

That explains everything

[Reuben]

Hot damn you're right... I suddenly understand the SECRET TO LIFE!

[silke]

Not at all. I holistically regard thread posts, chats, videos, preferences in music and artwork, social life, interests and activities, clothing choices, dietary habits, regular mien and moods, frequent expressions, etc. etc. etc. as interdependent aspects of a whole, no one ultimately being of greater importance than the rest. Similarly, I regard IEs within their functional framework as being a set of attractors with situationally variable charges and polarities, each working in concert with the others to produce the observed/experienced range of human cognition and behavior.

Eh, you don't really need to know that much information "thread posts, chats, videos, preferences in music and artwork, social life, interests and activities, clothing choices, dietary habits, regular mien and moods, frequent expressions, etc. etc. etc." and where they have taken their dog to take a leak at 1:00pm past Saturday afternoon to determine a person's type with good measure of confidence. Sometimes all it takes is just a few sentences that shed light on the person's cognitive processing. Just judging from what has so far been posted in this thread, for example, the fact that she has formed a sentimental attachment to a particular type and that she prefers to have these socionic-related feelings considered in favor of any sort of objective analysis already points far, far away from any Ti-valuing type.

[Birdie]

the fact that she has formed a sentimental attachment to a particular type and that she prefers to have these socionic-related feelings considered in favor of any sort of objective analysis

Please quote the posts where I have done this.

[Nico1e]

Hot damn you're right... I suddenly understand the SECRET TO LIFE!

Indeed, experiencing a paradigm shift can make one feel that way.

[marooned]

some people don't seem to understand tentative impressions or realizing something else which makes one draw a different, now less tentative, but still possible to change conclusion... I mean, for instance, is the process of getting to know someone or something a sudden jolt of "this is who you are" or "this is what it is," or is it more of a process, an unending one. I just don't understand why realizing more about a person or the subject, leading you to change the type leaning you would state for a person or yourself, must mean you're an idiot (because idiots get the "right answer" at once because it's really that simple when looking at a cut and dry subject such as Socionics or the simple beings that people are).

[Reuben]

I think Hydrangea is the Pink type:

Mr Wikipedia Says:Pink hydrangeas have many different meanings, but generally means, "You are the beat of my heart", as described by the celebrated Asian florist Tan Jun Yong, where he was quoted saying, "The light delicate blush of the petals reminds me of a beating heart, while the size could only match the heart of the sender!"

[silke]

I think those were just examples of various kinds of information that can get considered when typing someone.

I use a similar approach. I don't have to compile an exhaustive array of observations from all those indices—I just gather enough from a few different ones, until I feel sufficiently confident to render a conclusion; I'm fast about it now only because I've typed so many. If the typing's correct, then incoming evidence should continue to converge coherently towards that conclusion; if it doesn't, then I may be in error and I'll reassess.

No those weren't just "examples of various kind of information that can get considered when typing". This excerpt is part of Korpsey's argument that a "candid" interaction where he could harness this kind of information is superior to using a publicly presented persona on this forum. To this point I have disagreed stating that one does not need that much information for an accurate typing. I would suppose that this is a difference in process vs result types. I'd rather come to a typing first, too, then re-visit and change it if there is evidence that points otherwise.

Please quote the posts where I have done this.

Sure:

Actually before she commented on it in this thread I explained to her on IRC why I wouldn't justify my typing of her on the forum just yet, which she appeared to appreciate as she thanked me for considering her feelings in the matter (imagine that).

So what personal "feelings" could you possibly have over the matter of your typing that you prefer to have validated in favor of korpsey conducting an objective analysis of your type?

[woofwoofl]

I have disagreed stating that one does not need that much information for an accurate typing. I would suppose that this is a difference in process vs result types. I'd rather come to a typing first, too, then re-visit and change it if there is evidence that points otherwise.

That would be Positivist/Negativist; I've jumped the gun on typings many times, much to the bewilderment of INTxs

k0rpsey, from what I read in the chatbox when I was too tired to type out anything usable, has a good handle on what I do; if I see anything, and I mean anything at all, I'll put it down as a piece of a typing, or a dichotomy... I've had an instance ages ago where I had someone (not on the list) typed as "Aristocratic Irrational Extratim" for a long time until I went with SLE, and later Ti-SLE... and if something's wrong with anything and I find it? I change it! I'll open up a typing in a specific manner if I find an ambiguity I can't nail down, and my typesheet's full of odd notation (listing typings sequentially hides my rationale and biases towards the first typing in the list, neither of which I want to do)...

And yep, to get an accurate typing, one has to be correct, and there's multiple ways to reach "correct", some more effective than others depending on the person typing and on the person being typed...

[Korpsy Knievel]

No those weren't just "examples of various kind of information that can get considered when typing". This excerpt is part of Korpsey's argument that a "candid" interaction where he could harness this kind of information is superior to using a publicly presented persona on this forum.

Those were just examples of various kinds of information that could be considered when typing. I know you love picking cherries but plz lrn 2 rd.

I'd rather come to a typing first, too, then re-visit and change it if there is evidence that points otherwise.

Tentatively selecting a type and testing it for validity is part of the process, as is keeping an open mind to other possibilities. Bottom up, top down, a bit of both, or maybe just a bolt from the blue --- whatever results in a confident typing. Just don't mistake the destination for the road. There might just be more stops to come. No wonder my dad used to say, "Never show your work to women and children until it's done."

So what personal "feelings" could you possibly have over the matter of your typing that you prefer to have validated in favor of korpsey conducting an objective analysis of your type?

If you want to replace your wild speculations with some genuine knowinz then you'd better ride your Ni-broomstick a few days back to when I explained it before god and everyone else on IRC.

[Reuben]

Tentacles

I like them too <3

[Korpsy Knievel]

I've jumped the gun on typings many times, much to the bewilderment of INTxs

I've since learned to let it go and allow you to run the numbers down in your own way. *breathes*

to get an accurate typing, one has to be correct

Too fucking right.

[Birdie]

I think those were just examples of various kinds of information that can get considered when typing someone.

I use a similar approach. I don't have to compile an exhaustive array of observations from all those indices—I just gather enough from a few different ones, until I feel sufficiently confident to render a conclusion; I'm fast about it now only because I've typed so many. If the typing's correct, then incoming evidence should continue to converge coherently towards that conclusion; if it doesn't, then I may be in error and I'll reassess.

No those weren't just "examples of various kind of information that can get considered when typing". This excerpt is part of Korpsey's argument that a "candid" interaction where he could harness this kind of information is superior to using a publicly presented persona on this forum. To this point I have disagreed stating that one does not need that much information for an accurate typing. I would suppose that this is a difference in process vs result types. I'd rather come to a typing first, too, then re-visit and change it if there is evidence that points otherwise.


Sure:

Actually before she commented on it in this thread I explained to her on IRC why I wouldn't justify my typing of her on the forum just yet, which she appeared to appreciate as she thanked me for considering her feelings in the matter (imagine that).

So what personal "feelings" could you possibly have over the matter of your typing that you prefer to have validated in favor of korpsey conducting an objective analysis of your type?

It's not conducting an analysis of my type it's pinpointing all of my negative qualities which I focus enough of my attentions on without the help of others. If you'd have read thoroughly you would have already picked up on the contextual clues as I believe it was stated.

[Reuben]

So hydrangea, what is YOUR opinion of your type?

[splash]

Did you know that Madonna loathes hydrangeas?

[Creepy-male]

Did you know that Madonna loathes hydrangeas?

haha It's funny because that's her username, haha, ha, its like when the guy is all like "hey madonna I love you, here's a motherfucking hydrangea" and she's like DURLL "I don't like hydrangeas" its like, she's saying hey I don't like this one user from the 16types, haha, ha, it's like she's dissing her not the flower, get it, like instead of receiving the flowers and rejecting it, she is like reject the user, ha.... ha....... ha...... HOOOOOOOOOOOOO, *slaps knee*, phew.........................

Did I kill the joke yet?

[Reuben]

no




HEY GUiZ, did you KNOW lAik, MadoNNA HATez Teh HYDRRANGAA LOOOOLLLLLL

[Birdie]

I was mean and now I am guilty.

[Reuben]

Ok you are kidding right? *spank*

[splash]

Did you know that Madonna loathes hydrangeas?

haha It's funny because that's her username, haha, ha, its like when the guy is all like "hey madonna I love you, here's a motherfucking hydrangea" and she's like DURLL "I don't like hydrangeas" its like, she's saying hey I don't like this one user from the 16types, haha, ha, it's like she's dissing her not the flower, get it, like instead of receiving the flowers and rejecting it, she is like reject the user, ha.... ha....... ha...... HOOOOOOOOOOOOO, *slaps knee*, phew.........................

Did I kill the joke yet?

no you made it even more funny ^_^

[silke]

It's not conducting an analysis of my type it's pinpointing all of my negative qualities which I focus enough of my attentions on without the help of others. If you'd have read thoroughly you would have already picked up on the contextual clues as I believe it was stated.

Specifics don't matter much, that was more of a rhetorical question. The main point is that the way you call judgements doesn't align with Ti-F, but it does align with Fi-Te, making Delta NF be the most likely typing for you.

Those were just examples of various kinds of information that could be considered when typing. I know you love picking cherries but plz lrn 2 rd.

I was talking about the context of that debate, not about the literal interpretation of that one sentence.

If you want to replace your wild speculations with some genuine knowinz then you'd better ride your Ni-broomstick a few days back to when I explained it before god and everyone else on IRC.

See above, that was a rhetorical question. I don't really need to know the specifics of those exchanges to see that Hydrangea's decision making is based on introverted feeling rather than logic.

[Absurd]

Here kitty kitty.

[Birdie]

Specifics don't matter much, that was more of a rhetorical question. The main point is that the way you call judgements doesn't align with Ti-F, but it does align with Fi-Te, making Delta NF be the most likely typing for you.

On the contrary, they matter very much.
Think about this and let me know when you see the error of your ways.

[Reuben]

type doesn't matter.

in the end you're just an attractive female with a very guarded heart.

go find a man to break it open in just the right way for you.

[krieger]

I will tell you all now If I'm a "p" I'm about as J as they get. I schedule myself and others and become very irritated when things do not go according to the agreed upon schedule. I yearn extremely for a sense of security.

i'm the opposite way. *shrug*

[Birdie]

type doesn't matter.

I know.