Bwahaha, why so Ti Jim?
Bwahaha, why so Ti Jim?
Wholly bogus. And you're just sore because I won't agree to your SEE self-typing, though you certainly wasted no chance to butter me up in PMs on tinychat back when you still held some hope of that happening. Also this dumb response of yours shows that you really haven't been reading along.
What's interesting about this particular bit of scurrilous trash is that it neatly describes the near totality of your own behavior. The only thing missing is your odd penchant for branding everyone around you as "******s". Between that pervasive malfunction in your psyche to locate fault with everyone but yourself, and because of your strange reference to incest when you yourself are snugly ensconced in your own little clique and thus should have your entire posse's judgments dismissed by this standard you've just proclaimed, you and IJ's mommy phobia ought to have a flop on a psychiatrist's couch.
So then produce your superior method for the world to follow instead of simply hoping people will accept your finger-pointing as something other than a vain twit's fever dream.
Bump.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
...and is a copy, of a copy, of a copy, of something that has never yet succeeded in yielding what you are looking for, and you have not contributed, posting in this thread despite "not having time." Stop being a tool; you're obviously not stupid, so stop acting like it.
But, for a certainty, back then,
We loved so many, yet hated so much,
We hurt others and were hurt ourselves...
Yet even then, we ran like the wind,
Whilst our laughter echoed,
Under cerulean skies...
No, there's a couple of people who disagree with my self-typing who have made interesting points and observations that actually have the ability to remain observant and impartial. I don't even think that the people who agree with me here as being SEE know what they are talking about (for the most part) and have accepted it purely because I have changed and stuck with it. What you agree or disagree with means nothing to me, and even if it did, I can acknowledge someone when they bring up good points, correlations, etc without having them need to agree with me as a necessity. The way you go about it is fundamentally impression based with justification riddled on top of it, which I fail to see how that would produce an accurate typing. As far as buttering you up goes, I PM'd alot of people to get more information about types. I was tentatively testing out SEE, the idea that I wanted your approval on a typing I was still in the process of working out is narcissism at it's best.
This is exactly the kind of thing I'm talking about, where you rely on these phantoms you have conjured up as basis for typing and analysis. I have no idea what clique you are talking about. I don't type using an 'impression based method', I highly doubt you know how I type since I don't do any serious typing out in public chat and don't bother to talk about it in depth on the forums anymore - for the same reason, neither would you know who I talk to about those ideas. Saying that I have a penchant for blaming everyone but myself shows you know nothing at all about me. As far as methods goes, I mentioned where to focus your attention on an individual. Stop doing everything I mentioned above and make more of an effort to see the individual for who they are and where they are coming from (instead of completely relying on your own, many times faulty, judgement) - backed with a knowledge of IE's which I'm sure you can find the information for, you should be fine. I would also look up articles on the differences between Jung and Augusta's theories (there's a couple in russian) since some ideas are fundamentally incompatible which you don't seem to understand. You also need a revision on merry quadras since you habitually harp bullshit about them that go no deeper than superficial correlations like the one above.(bronyism is superficically Fe/Ti lolz). You've been brushing up on enneagram, so focusing on the stackings and triads would probably give you better perspective as to what traits are not related to IE's. Other then that, go fuck yourself.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not
Jim, sincere question: why do you care so much?
I think the lady doth protest too much.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
Yet you're still squawking away about something you say doesn't matter. So you're some combination of lying and confused.
And you were definitely testing my reaction to your "tentative" typing by glomming onto me in tinychat every time I entered and pestering me for insights into the ILI perspective, not to mention asking whether I agreed with your self-appraisal as SEE. And when I got tired of you breathing on me and didn't support your attempt at quadra-hopping you turned hostile and pretended my opinion didn't matter any more.
Beep beep beep, tinychat, the place where you're frequently active, making your usual dumb accusations and never-followed-through provocations.
Yet this is more or less how I go about typings, by contextualizing people's posting and chat history against a background of information from Jung, wikisocion, socionics.us, various Russian/Ukrainian sites, and so on. So again it's you making the stupidly presumptuous comments based on faulty impressions.
Take note of who authored these threads and who responded to them positively. Alphas, some betas, and a few deltas. Gammas who responded were generally appalled and repulsed by such puerile shit. Even woof, who I like to tease as loving everything, only went so far as to note that alphas feel toward these sparkly-assed ponies the way he does toward Daria:
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...p/37179-Ponies
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...My-Little-Pony
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...dship-Is-Magic
And any other observations I've made about Merry quadras comes from dealing with you dick-knockers on this forum. See if you can count the number of posts referring to Fe as being fake, or alphas being giant babies who need coddling. You'll be at it for days.
I happen to like ponies.
However, that show is for 6 year old little girls. There is no getting around it. I do not see the appeal.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
And I like how the mentally unstable are quick to make fun of people. At least none of them were dumb enough to post their own nudes on a public forum. Attention seeking ******.
Everyone, say hello to our visiting psychologist, Ryan.
"[Scapegrace,] I don't know how anyone can stand such a sinister and mean individual as you." - Maritsa Darmandzhyan
Brought to you by socionix.com
If Woofl learned to wear clothes regularly he would do the straight men a service.
I almost choked on my toast and beans: Typology via. cartoons.
I don't understand why k0rpsy keeps talking about socionics if he can't actually refer to model A and instead types using looser and looser and looser correlations upon correlations that do not causation make.
It's the height of unethical incompetence to post this drivel without discussing the contradictions and limitations in addition to the ever increasing deviation from the core model.
However, it does offer one explanation of why his 'typing of forum members' has such poor convergence versus self-typionics (statistically worse than maritsa).
Last edited by InvisibleJim; 12-01-2012 at 11:21 AM.
I hope you see the irony in this post Ryan.
"I like how the mentally unstable are quick to make fun of people".
"Attention seeking ******."
Wait-- is that not making fun of someone? Can we not infer from your post that this now puts you in the group
of the mentally unstable? I truly hope you're not this big of a dickhead in person and that this is just your
internet persona trying to be a badass. I'd hate to think of you angering the wrong man.
If you do have this bad of an attitude when someone opposes you or differs in beliefs and morals from you,
I suggest from the heart that you take some time to work on responding more civilly and tactfully. I think it
could be of use to you.
Instead of beating around the bush you could have copied me and tried to use that same logic in your post. In fact, I want you to do it. Go for it. See if you can make it work. Maybe then you would have realized how fucking wrong you are. Dumb bitch.
I leave the civility and tactfulness to your kind. You need it more than I do.
Your opinion on my type means nothing to me, that isn't what we're discussing. I asked a number of people their opinions on types I was considering as I was going through different ones- which ranged from Beta NF to SEE. I asked you both those things for the same reason, I was curious about your input. You are making it more than what it was, as well as distorting events. You never supported my attempt at 'quadra-hopping', you shameless liar. Since the first time I private messaged you, you expressed to me that you didn't think I was SEE. At best, you were skeptical but open to the idea that you could be wrong which doesn't constitute as 'being supportive' - I wouldn't have gone past 1 private message conversing with you if that's what I was after. Also, I'm not pretending. I have no interest in your opinions on socionics any more, because after having pressed you for rationale, the foundation of your opinion rested on intuitive impressions you couldn't substantiate with anything tangible. You also have this extremely warped impression of what I do here and why I do them which remains consistently off the mark.
As far as turning hostile towards you goes, I treat you as I do any other person on here with a pompous attitude and sub-par rationale. What you are experiencing from me has to do with the understanding I have gained in terms of who I perceive you to be as a person and how you conduct yourself towards other people. As I said above, there are people on here who don't agree with my opinion who make respectable points type-wise, and overall are respectable people who I don't display hostility towards. You don't fit those categories to me. My hostility ranges in its reasons, but not agreeing on my type isn't one of them. I'm sure your petty ego would like to think it is for socionics reasons, so please don't allow what I said to stop you from thinking that.
Tinychat isn't a clique dumbass.
Yes, you use those sources but you make the same mistakes I mentioned in http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post919751 which makes your process faulty. If your perception is skewed it doesn't matter how may tools (sources) you have at your disposal, the result will be fundamentally unreliable as evidenced by that shoddy analysis in the OP.
This isn't substantial. People like and dislike things for different reasons, the fact that you managed to find a pattern on this forum means little to nothing - especially considering the small sample size. Quickly pinning a pattern like this to quadras is only useful for giving misleading impressions. Personally I would only associate shows with elements purely for fun and mostly in jest. Some shows can be a interesting showcase for IE's but I would never attempt to use someone enjoying/liking that show as a point towards a typing, that's beyond ridiculous. That pattern means literally nothing applied person to person - the 'why and how' are the cruxes, the former which you have an uncanny ability of assuming wrongly. A presumptuous mentality is what pervasively surrounds all your typings and what needs to be rectified if you hope to gain any form of competency.
<Crispy> what subt doesnt understand is that a healthy reaction to "FUCK YOU" is and not
woohoo Ti/Fe mind gamez
bwaaahahaha
Why must you bullshit?
and here @InvisibleJim, this ain't a flowchart but it's something, more or less my process from the very start:
1) lay down decent-enough foundational knowledge of Socionics
2) get some solid types down that have solid consensus
3) look for commonalities and contrasts between those types that fall on differing sides of dichotomies or quadrants (quadras, temperaments, cog styles, etc.)
4) use those revelations to help nail down types I've been previously undecided on
5) go to step 3
So wow, Pirate, you've gotten no newfound insight that you apply to your typings; you're just at square one, doing little more than eating black squiggles off a white background and vomitting and shitting them out in paraphrase?
Why must you bullshit?
k
So k0rp shows his work, you shit on him for it, while you not only abstain from putting in any work of your own, but actively muddle things up by dicking around with your self-typing. Okay.
Show your work. Get some more typings down. Feed the spreadsheet. Do something constructive instead of just blowing smoke.
With no pic, no backstory, nothing really of yourself you've offered us here, there's not even a "you" to piss on. Thankfully, you've handled that yourself when aiming up at my leg to tinkle against the wind.
@ u
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
@woofwoofl, you should probably mark that nsfw.
Was not expecting to see you completely.
My virgin eyes.
p . . . a . . . n . . . d . . . o . . . r . . . a
trad metalz | (more coming)
Hmm, you want to have sex with Ryan and Tackk, while watching my little pony, woofwoofl?
It doesn't matter that Reinin lacks these concepts, because that's what Model A is for; the two are all complementary and shit.
The point is, you seem to be a positivist.
Or you can just use positivism/negativism.
lol I can't believe my soul had to stomach re-reading an old k0rpsey drama thread. but lol @ him actually thinking his critiques are 'external' and not colored with his own subjective feelings and impressions.
I've noticed that this forum had a bad habit of that, but maybe it's in the past now (this thread IS two years old) I remember people seriously thinking other posters were 'more factual' and 'objective' or something just because their personalities weren't as outwardly nice and victimy or something. That's so lame. Truth is truth, it doesn't matter how you say it - whether in a harsh sadistic k0rpsey way or a sugarcoated victimy maritsa way or a neutral try to be fair to all parties bg way.
No wonder so many people here had low self-esteem issues just because somebody told them lies with bite.