workaholicsanon

[Suz]

*sigh*. workaholicsanon, i really don't appreciate the way you go about 'discussing' things with me. basically, it seems like you reach a 'conclusion' about what i said or didn't say (or feel or didn't feel - like hate you?!) and then slap it onto my lap as if it were my responsibility to refute it or not.

it is your responsibility to make sure you understand communication you've voluntarily entered into.

I feel the same way about you...

i've already said i don't deal in other people's heads/hidden motives.

yes you did state that, and yet at the same time, that's exactly what you yourself admitted doing, in different words perhaps... but you did make a lot of wrong assumptions about me. My responses to you were attempts at clarifying your misconceptions about me.

i don't care about your type - you are convinced you are enfp - fi, good for you as far as i'm concerned.

also, what ssmall said sums up my 'feelings' over this.

/end discussion over your type, pls. do not approach me over it again.Ps: and no, i don't agree w/you on any of the points. i have a right to my own opinion.
PPS: do not quote me, thank you!

That's another thing itake offense at. I did not derail my Micheal Phelps type thread. YOU were the one who derailed it. YOU were the one who called for discussion of my type. And well, if you do, and you start saying these vague things about how i'm not this or i'm not that, i WILL expect you to back that up. So if you dont want to be involved in discussions of my type with me, how about you dont bring the subject up in the first place.

If you do bring the subject up though, as i said in the other thread, i will expect explanations from you as to why you think so. If you dont provide them, I will prompt you for them, as i did in the other thread. And also if you have some wrong assumptions about me, i will start correcting you.

I'm sorry you had such a hard time with these expectations from me... I guess it's because you didn't really have any good reasons for your frivolous statement about me not being an Fi type, and you didn't like being pressed for more information (because you really didn't have any--and your knowledge of socionics is obviously weak). Also looks like you didn't enjoy having your misconceptions about me corrected.

So, girl, quit twisting things around saying i approached you about my type, when you were the one who approached me about it. I've just been reacting to your gross generalities and inaccurate statements about me.

[ashlesha]

as for your sig have you considered 2? thoughts?

[Suz]

as for your sig have you considered 2? thoughts?

oh sorry i just saw this...

I did actually consider ennea 2 for a while after confimed/golden put it on the table for consideration a while back. a bunch of people seemed to lean 6 or 7 for me though, and tbh i could see myself as any of those (2, 6, 7, even maybe 3)...That's why the enneatype came down and the question in my sig went up