My typing of forum members

[Creepy-pikachu]

Jim, this isn't working

Korp didn't ask any of us for help, he is not our "leader" nor does he have any kind of following; he does happen to be exceptionally insightful and that is the reason his rationale is being supported.

I for one know that you cannot chalk up my typings to support for him, because I engaged you when you were still new to the forum, and tentatively typed you LSI on our first webcam encounter. Try not to take offense as I am typing you as my dual; that should ring of a compliment, if anything.

y u no type me as dual?!?!?! ps. Fi lolz

[Creepy-]

That doesn't help as well, it actually proves the opposite. The more of yous are going to show up in support of human, the more Jim is going to get deluded?

Eh, let him.

[Absurd]

Eh, let him.

Eh, okay, 10 crates of beer is the price. I'm going to share with Jim after I drink all of it.

[Korpsy Knievel]

lets call it a hunch for the time being

examine it all you want, but leave me out of it

Alright but that's unfortunate since I prefer to do this through dialogue.

[Ryan]

Alright but that's unfortunate since I prefer to do this through dialogue.

Unfortunate indeed. I hear you have a type for me regardless, so I'm looking forward it.

[Absurd]

Do it, korpsey, you said you like challenges, don't you?

[Korpsy Knievel]

K0rpsy has disproved his own capability by setting the criteria of proof.

Endlessly repeating a statement isn't an argument, it's a chanted mantra that's used to move the speaker into a trance. In other words it's useful for drowning out the world around you and becoming immersed in your own.

Team k0rpsy wanted a quote and they got it.

Now list the members of my team.

The facts speak for themselves;

Then show your evidence instead of just jabbering on and on about it.

I couldn't care less for the interpersonal dynamics.

But you keep banging your gums about beta quadra behavior to rope everyone into a category convenient to your Big Lie campaign. So this is another bratty deception.

Of course I was really just enjoying getting the team out in force

But you just said the group dynamics are meaningless. What an incoherent mess you're making.

Me and Arsal have always been on good terms, he just gets nervous around conflict.

This may or may not be true since you're speaking for the both of you, not to mention that your pants are on fire. But we'll find out if we find out.

Don't callously push your problems onto other people.

Heed your own advice.

Keep it between you and me.

Would you prefer we go to PM so you can post those out of context?

@InvisibleJim: https://twitter.com/Maritsa33

(BTW: If Jim is LSI I will eat my toe jam. Oh, wait, I already do that. Never mind, carry on.)

So noted. Also for the record, allow me to point out in all extremely grave internet seriousness that duality is no assurance of mutual wonderfulness. I can think of a few people I regard as my duals who I'd rather not be around at all.

[InvisibleJim]

The octopus abortions continue

k0rpsy.



That is all

[Absurd]

And to think I paid for the tickets, but just to pour more petrol into fire, tribe has spoken, Jim. There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee...that says, fool me once, shame on...shame on you. Fool me...you can't get fooled again, which means to pull out a Mountain Dewism Invisible Jim stands for Ij temperament.

[InvisibleJim]

And to think I paid for the tickets, but just to pour more petrol into fire, tribe has spoken, Jim.

Wendy Koopa and these jokers? I havent seen so much backtracking since 2002.

[Absurd]

Don't insult Koopa Kingdom, we rule for eternity. As for KKK, well, bunch of mice thinking they're dragons, especially in the North. Anyhow, what Pa3z did there, was ironic, that is, he let you know, you're not KKK.

So Jim, you're going to accept that you're LSI?

[Korpsy Knievel]

The octopus abortions continue

k0rpsy.



That is all

Now upload the spreadsheet as requested before. Refusal makes it obvious that you've cooked the numbers to create false impressions and are just running on empty propaganda.

What's also of note is that you're simultaneously using Maritsa as a human shield and also stabbing her in the back by using her as a benchmark of shitty and shittier analysis. You already tried hiding behind siuntal and Eliza, so your regular recourse to hostage-taking is a persistent and prominent pattern.

[InvisibleJim]

Now upload the spreadsheet as requested before. Refusal makes it obvious that you've cooked the numbers to create false impressions and are just running on empty propaganda.

I'm not your mother. Do your own Due Diligence.

[Absurd]

This is a waste of time, seriously, everyone is of opinion you're LSI, Jim, even your duals, I think. Former duals, I mean. You can be identicals with squark now and duals with CONFIMED. What's wrong?

[golden]

This is a waste of time, seriously, everyone is of opinion you're LSI, Jim, even your duals, I think. Former duals, I mean. You can be identicals with squark now and duals with CONFIMED. What's wrong?

He could be my dual, but he's not my dual, if you know what I mean. I can't make much sense out of him. Even people I dislike I can sometimes understand perfectly well. Guess I'm Delta, after all.

[InvisibleJim]

This is a waste of time, seriously.

Umm, aren't you in the pragmatists club this week Absurd?

No, I'm clearly negativist. It's like the deaf leading the blind on this forum.

[squark]

Irrelevant. The reference is there.

I wasn't going to respond in this thread, but gah. No. It is not irrelevant. You cannot quote someone making a joke and say that they were serious and actually believe what they said in the joke - that's just . . . ridiculous. Context matters man. A person could probably take random words that you've typed in various places and put them together to say some rather far-fetched things, and you can't deny you said them, the words are there - but they'd be completely out of context, and not at all communicating what you intended.

Why does this even have to be explained??

This is a waste of time, seriously, everyone is of opinion you're LSI, Jim, even your duals, I think. Former duals, I mean. You can be identicals with squark now and duals with CONFIMED. What's wrong?

No.

[SyrupDeGem]

Oh wait... is this thread about Jim's type? I thought it was just another platform for the fighting.

He's ILI in my opinion. You want i should elaborate? I can... but it does mean i will have to organize my thoughts into some form of coherent output that will make sense for other people when reading ....and even then it might not.

[InvisibleJim]

How are you clearly Negativist…? I’d say you tend to speak more in terms of presence and convergence of information—i.e., “it is this”, “all signs clearly point to that”, etc.

You are spoiling my fun here by talking socionics theory Ashton. I was still enjoying the dancing.

The fundamental difference between rational and irrational information elements is not built into the Reinin model. Also, it has no concept of functional ordering. If you use Renin without referring back to Model A you can get into a pickle.

It model A it is recognized that Pi first seeks convergence by eliminating inconsistencies as a first priority and then expresses the result concisely.

But either way, you can't properly differentiate LII/ILI/SLI/LSI without considering the ethics of the situation which will provide a generally clear split, then you for quadra/club together both as confirmation and as a second criterion.

[squark]

I suspect he knows all of this, but is disregarding the context of the remark to score some niggling hyper-literal logical point.

I don't know if that's better or worse. I hope he doesn't think he's actually proving something though.

[Korpsy Knievel]

I'm not your mother.

Statisticians like to joke that it takes three data points to make a trend. Thanks for providing the third:

If you want some quotes on that, go get your own quotes, I'm not your mother.

I don't know why you like ESC so much, but that's your problem and I'm not your mother so I won't be fixing your problems.

Sehr interessant. Mommy casts a great shadow over little Jim, rendering him invisible in the darkness. Excerpted from Helen Palmer:

"Sixes lost faith in authorities when they were young. They remember being afraid of those who had power over them, of being unable to act on their own behalf. Those memories have carried over into adult life as a suspiciousness of other people's motives; Sixes try to ease their insecurity by seeking either a strong protector or by going against authority in the Devils' Advocate stand."

And look how you've pumped me up to be some great cult leader that you in your heroic bravery are taking down, screaming paranoid fabrications all the while about conspirators plotting in concert against you. Is that how your mommy was too? Odd.

From Enneagram Institute, a portrait of your antics since your typing thread went other than you hoped:

Level 5: To resist having more demands made on them, [Sixes] react against others passive-aggressively. Become evasive, indecisive, cautious, procrastinating, and ambivalent. Are highly reactive, anxious, and negative, giving contradictory, "mixed signals." Internal confusion makes them react unpredictably.

Level 6: To compensate for insecurities, they become sarcastic and belligerent, blaming others for their problems, taking a tough stance toward "outsiders." Highly reactive and defensive, dividing people into friends and enemies, while looking for threats to their own security. Authoritarian while fearful of authority, highly suspicious, yet, conspiratorial, and fear-instilling to silence their own fears.

You're pretty close to Level 7, which is rather unhealthy. Either way, it's pretty obvious you're a counterphobic six:

“Lost” essential quality: Faith in self, others and the universe.

Compensating belief: The world is dangerous, threatening. People can’t be trusted. You must seek or defy security, avoid or face danger.

Attention/coping strategy: Becoming vigilant, questioning or doubting. Scanning for what can go wrong. Seeking certainty either by defying security and facing danger (the counter-phobic style) or by seeking security and avoiding danger (the phobic style).

Trap: Seeking certainty for which there is never enough proof.

Driving energy: Fear associated with all the possible dangers or hazards.

Avoidance: Becoming helpless and defenseless, avoided either by aligning with authority (the phobic style) or by defying it (the counter-phobic style).

Strengths: Spotting hazards, heightened intuition, loyalty, thoughtfulness.

Paradox: Seeking too much certainty in an uncertain world creates more uncertainty and anxiety.

Path of development:

Accept insecurity as part of life
Develop inner faith in self, others and the world
Recognize that both flight and fight are reactions to fear
Observe fear and calm it
Move ahead in spite of fear

Ultimate task: Reclaiming trust in yourself, others and the world, and living comfortably with uncertainty.

http://www.enneagramworldwide.com/ex...ram-type-6.php

Also, from LifeExplore:

Tension between needing to be seen and withdrawing for protection. Might act arrogant or cryptic or cynical when afraid. When phobic, can be diplomatic and say things without saying them. Entranced counterphobics are either cool and loners or argumentative, tending towards violence. Can brood over injustices to them, entertain conspiracy theories, spend time alone building cases. Paranoia in private. May like secretive behind-the-scenes group activity. Sneaky vengeance, passive/aggressive toward others, self-attacking and self-destructive at home.

Plus projecting the underlined onto others to dissociate yourself from your own emotional and moral filth.

Do your own Due Diligence.

No worries there, I've got you more than covered, with further analysis to come unless you start scrubbing your posts. I was just hoping you'd be man enough to actually show your work rather than repeating conclusions. That is, unless you prefer to remain being seen as a Result type rather than Process, not to mention a fake.

I'm a bit pressed for time at the moment but I look forward to resuming this later, comparing posts with data freely available at wikisocion, assuming that no spoilsports call the cops. You're invited to present your own evidence-based case in the meantime.

[InvisibleJim]

TLR

You talk too much and with too much irrelevant content. The topic of the thread is 'k0rpsys typing of forum members'.

It's like some kind of chronic stupidity where you can't reach the fucking point.

You... just gotta.... shake.... it.... out.

A few years ago I had a discussion with Helen, she thought I was 5w6, I stated that I preferred 6w5. I'm cool with that; so I don't really care about today's k0rpsy psychobabble regarding enneagram.

No worries there, I've got you more than covered, with further analysis to come unless you start scrubbing your posts.

I'm waiting; it's not much of a threat because I just went to the data and used it.

Okay, just that if you’re going to try justifying your type based on Reinins, you may want to defer more towards what the Ruskies have actually written about them—I’d recommend this article for developing one's understanding (Positivism|Negativism is halfway down).

However, if you’d like to ignore Reinins for now and argue based on other type indices, that’s fine too.

You need to understand the basis of the theory and it's limitations, talk to Olga, or Vlad or Jadae even. Infact even check wikisocion which says the same thing I do (almost word for word):

The usefulness of many or most Reinin dichotomies is consistently questioned by many socionists.

Criticism

It might be said that the Reinin traits should be treated dichotomously instead of, or at least in addition to, in terms of information elements and Model A. The fundamental difference between rational and irrational information elements is not built into the Reinin model. Also, it has no concept of element dominance (i.e. functional ordering). It doesn't necessarily render the tools used in Model A useless, but it should be stressed that the classical traits have a purely dichotomous definition, so they should also be explainable using only dichotomies. In fact it is likely that any regular categorization system will also be reflected in Model A in some more or less regular way—this observation doesn't prove anything however.

Effectively it is argued that the Renin dichotomies have an empirical basis from the original paper and therefore that correlation does not imply causation.

[Korpsy Knievel]

Oh wait... is this thread about Jim's type?

Only for the time being. Ryan is next on deck.

He's ILI in my opinion. You want i should elaborate? I can... but it does mean i will have to organize my thoughts into some form of coherent output that will make sense for other people when reading ....and even then it might not.

Go for it.

I wasn't going to respond in this thread, but gah. No. It is not irrelevant. You cannot quote someone making a joke and say that they were serious and actually believe what they said in the joke - that's just . . . ridiculous. Context matters man. A person could probably take random words that you've typed in various places and put them together to say some rather far-fetched things, and you can't deny you said them, the words are there - but they'd be completely out of context, and not at all communicating what you intended.

Exactly.

[Korpsy Knievel]

You talk too much and with too much irrelevant content. The topic of the thread is 'k0rpsys typing of forum members'.

It's like some kind of chronic stupidity where you can't reach the fucking point.

You... just gotta.... shake.... it.... out.

Another point for you being -ignoring. Also for your inability to actually respond to anything with more than spastic hand waving.

A few years ago I had a discussion with Helen, she thought I was 5w6, I stated that I preferred 6w5. I'm cool with that; so I don't really care about today's k0rpsy psychobabble regarding enneagram.

Finally, you've agreed to something, but only because you don't think it jeopardizes your precarious perch.

I'm waiting; it's not much of a threat because I just went to the data and used it.

Yet you've repeatedly refused to upload the spreadsheet so the numbers and the math can be examined. Anyone can make a graph with fake data that produces the desired appearance. Not to mention that there are three sorts of lies: Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

You need to understand the basis of the theory and it's limitations, talk to Olga, or Vlad or Jadae even. Infact even check wikisocion which says the same thing I do (almost word for word):

Post it up.

[InvisibleJim]

Finally, you've agreed to something, but only because you don't think it jeopardizes your precarious perch.

Post it up.

Are you drunk? I entered this forum wearing a 6w5 badge and wore it forever

Please tell me more about this ignorance of yours.

[InvisibleJim]

If you don’t buy into Reinins, then don’t use them as a basis to argue your type.

You stated you were “clearly Negativist”, I suggested otherwise and tossed a decent article your way about them to back what I said… and now you cry that Reinins are meaningless. Okay.

More inclined to solve problems in systems of things and processes.
"This glass is half-empty", "We need $62,000 for that project"
Usually more reprimanding than complimenting.
Socially and intellectually more mistrusting.
Explains what things are (irrationals) or should be (rationals).

*shrug* 4/5 negativist seems pretty clear to me, it doesn't mean I think that the negativist dichotomy means anything; but you need to understand the origin of the theory to understand the limitation of me saying that.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post919596

[InvisibleJim]

Positivists (ILE, ESE, LSI, IEI, LIE, SEE, EII, SLI):

• Positivists initially pay attention to what is present in a situation (what exists, what is there) what can realistically occur, what can be interpreted as an affirmative manifestation of surrounding world, situations, possibilities, prospects.
• Positivists are oriented at what any situation or contact with people can potentially bring to them rather than what they could potentially lose (for example, moving is viewed as an opportunity to gain new acquaintances, friends, rather than primarily in terms of losing existing friends). For them an orientation towards success is more characteristic, rather than on avoidance of failure.
• Positives are better at assimilating affirmative experiences. They are inclined to "convert" negative experiences into positive ones (they try to find the silver lining).
• They speak more of the positive and try to present negative moments in a positive background ("Yes, this is a problem, but..."—the continued to paint a positive picture). Conversations about the negative (when the other person accentuates deficiencies, absence, impossibility) can irritate Positivist types.
• In speech of Positivists one can detect, mostly, affirmative constructions and intonations. If they are giving instructions to someone else, they present them in positive manner: they talk about what can be done or what should be done in different situations (for example, "you can call them only at this time") rather than what cannot or should not be done.

Negativists (SEI, LII, SLE, EIE, ILI, ESI, IEE, LSE):

• Negativists pay attention to aspects of the situation that are insufficient or lacking, which can be interpreted as seeing the negative prospects of various situations and events.
• Negativists orient towards what they could potentially lose as a result of a certain situation or contact with other people, rather than towards what this situation or contact can bring to them (for example, moving for negativists primarily means losing friends).
• Negativists focus on avoiding failures (the "positive" development of a situation in the fact that nothing bad has happened so far).
• Negativists are better at assimilating negating, negative experiences. They tend to outline negative sides of affairs.
• Negativists are more inclined to speak about negative moments. Positive aspects are presented on a negative background ("Well, this is good, but..."—then mentions what is lacking, what is not right). Negativists are irritated by "excessively positive" attitudes (when another person "forgets" to mention or even consider negative aspects of something).
• In speech of negativists there is frequent use of negating expressions (negative pronouns, adverbs, "not" "cannot" "nobody" "never"). For example: "Negative experiences are not always necessary, I don't need them" "There won't be an occasion to do anything" "I cannot say that this is not true" etc. If giving instructions they first of all talk about things to avoid, what should not be done (For example "If you call them at such a time it will be pointless”).

Giggity giggity, exactly 5/6 points which almost match the other points except they appear more 'literative' and authourative which serves to add confusion instead of concise accuracy.

Is this is where you state 1/5 or 1/6 is overwhelming evidence in favour of positivism? I'm going to save you a reply by stating that out loud but you I get the impression that you aren't going to take the hint.

p.s. I did read the article but I found it alarmingly dangerous that it did not come appropriately caveated. That is much more dangerous than me pissing about with people in a thread for shits and giggles with a bit of a moral crusade on the side if people really are forgetting all of the basis of the ideas and theories of socionics because they have stopped thinking. It probably explains a few things about what goes on around here. I recommend you correct it in due course to match best practice because I can't be arsed.

[Scapegrace]

Clearly I have a lot to say on this subject.
(Looks that way. What with all the fake badasses.)

In the spirt of Lord Jim.

[Gilly]

y u no type me as dual?!?!?! ps. Fi lolz

Because you're not Sry k?

[Gilly]

K0rpsy has disproved his own capability by setting the criteria of proof.

What? Ok first of all, one isolated incident of anything doesn't disprove k0rpsy's capability, especially seeing as he has proven himself an accurate typer in various other instances.

And no I am not going to go fetch you proof, I really don't give a shit what you think of k0rp, but I also don't care to see you draw false conclusions.

Team k0rpsy wanted a quote and they got it.

The facts speak for themselves; I couldn't care less for the interpersonal dynamics.

Ok I'm not sure what facts or which quote you're talking about, clearly something other than what I was referencing in my post so I'm kind of lost here.

Of course I was really just enjoying getting the team out in force

[Gilly]

Likewise. You've got an impressive ability to expound on socionics and enneagram in depth.

I appreciate that. A while ago I came under the impression that you saw me as one of the people who made you feel unwelcome here, and I'm glad that either was not or is no longer the case.

[Creepy-pikachu]

Because you're not Sry k?

booooooooooo. no awkward sex for you.

[Beautiful sky]

Negativists (SEI, LII, SLE, EIE, ILI, ESI, IEE, LSE):
Negativists pay attention to aspects of the situation that are insufficient or lacking, which can be interpreted as seeing the negative prospects of various situations and events.

p.s. I did read the article but I found it alarmingly dangerous

Point taken.

[thePirate]

What? Ok first of all, one isolated incident of anything doesn't disprove k0rpsy's capability, especially seeing as he has proven himself an accurate typer in various other instances.
And no I am not going to go fetch you proof, I really don't give a shit what you think of k0rp, but I also don't care to see you draw false conclusions.

I would like to see these other instances. This thread is pretty similar to how he goes about typing in other cases I've seen him in - primarily relying on conjecture (assumptions of peoples motivations, plans, etc), half-assed attempts at IE correlations, and strained comparisons to other forum members (I.E. ESC and InvisibleJim). There's nothing in this thread for instance that he has pointed out that cements Jim as LII, he marks behaviors and responses as 'stereotypically blah blah' and uses that as evidence for someone's type which is a fundamentally flawed way of typing. He places little to no emphasis on ascertaining where someone's cognitive focus lies, just on what IE's he see's as being expressed which (going hand in hand with his emotional instability and sensitivity) make it so that he's highly prone to make justifications for people's types based on a whim.

People agreeing with him comes from the simple fact that this forum has become incestuous as far as opinions go, people will discuss with each other their opinions in chats and form consensus based on little examination and 'similar impressions' which don't actually mean jack shit since, like this thread is an example of, usually does not follow logically or substantially. he isn't the only one doing this, but I'm rather surprised you regard him in particular with any sort of respect in this matter.

For the record, I think both invisible jim and korpsey are little bitches. I agree that jim is more likely Fe/Ti than Fi/Te but for different reasons, and regard korpsy's 'examination' in this thread as a template of what this forum should strive to avoid - not only in terms of typing people, but in terms of generally understanding another person.

[InvisibleJim]

For the record, I think both invisible jim and korpsey are little bitches.

True that. I'm the littlest bitch, I love my bitching; hence me winding up k0rpsy and friends.

On another note it would help if the "?star?" typologists identify the process through which they type people. There should be something resembling a standard process (or a few) and acceptable error with appropriate caveats. Flowcharts would help significantly. I mean come on, this forum has been around for long enough for that knowledge to exist. I suspect that sort of discussion is not in the interest of certain individuals.

Actually, there you go: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...756#post919756

[Absurd]

He could be my dual, but he's not my dual, if you know what I mean. I can't make much sense out of him. Even people I dislike I can sometimes understand perfectly well. Guess I'm Delta, after all.

Well, Delta quadra is like a story that always stays fresh no matter how old it gets, and one wants more of it, just like with old wine and women, so I understand your sentiments perfectly, COMFINED.

Umm, aren't you in the pragmatists club this week Absurd?

I think I have always been, first self-typed SLI, skimming through Socionics material before registering on here, so yes.

No.

Pretty please...

[Gilly]

True that. I'm the littlest bitch, I love my bitching; hence me winding up k0rpsy and friends.

On another note it would help if the "?star?" typologists identify the process through which they type people. There should be something resembling a standard process (or a few) and acceptable error with appropriate caveats. Flowcharts would help significantly. I mean come on, this forum has been around for long enough for that knowledge to exist. I suspect that sort of discussion is not in the interest of certain individuals.

Actually, there you go: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...756#post919756

Unfortunately for your cubist brain, typing is not a scientific process.

[InvisibleJim]

Unfortunately for your cubist brain, typing is not a scientific process.

A process doesn't have to be a scientific one it can simply be a plan of attack. How very academic to believe that it's a mathematical workflow.

[Gilly]

A process doesn't have to be a scientific one it can simply be a plan of attack. How very academic to believe that it's a mathematical workflow.

You're the one asking for fucking flowcharts, dude. You can't be serious. If you want to undertake all that crap, more power to you, but this is a hobby and a social outlet for most, including me, and I wouldn't derive much enjoyment from that.

[Gilly]

I would like to see these other instances. This thread is pretty similar to how he goes about typing in other cases I've seen him in - primarily relying on conjecture (assumptions of peoples motivations, plans, etc), half-assed attempts at IE correlations, and strained comparisons to other forum members (I.E. ESC and InvisibleJim). There's nothing in this thread for instance that he has pointed out that cements Jim as LII, he marks behaviors and responses as 'stereotypically blah blah' and uses that as evidence for someone's type which is a fundamentally flawed way of typing. He places little to no emphasis on ascertaining where someone's cognitive focus lies, just on what IE's he see's as being expressed which (going hand in hand with his emotional instability and sensitivity) make it so that he's highly prone to make justifications for people's types based on a whim.

People agreeing with him comes from the simple fact that this forum has become incestuous as far as opinions go, people will discuss with each other their opinions in chats and form consensus based on little examination and 'similar impressions' which don't actually mean jack shit since, like this thread is an example of, usually does not follow logically or substantially. he isn't the only one doing this, but I'm rather surprised you regard him in particular with any sort of respect in this matter.

For the record, I think both invisible jim and korpsey are little bitches. I agree that jim is more likely Fe/Ti than Fi/Te but for different reasons, and regard korpsy's 'examination' in this thread as a template of what this forum should strive to avoid - not only in terms of typing people, but in terms of generally understanding another person.

Like I said, I'm not going to play errand boy, I really don't care enough. But I do think k0rpsy's judgment is pretty good, and I actually trust yours less, you and discojoe and jenna seem to have devised your own standards, so...not sure what you want from me.