You are one of the few people who I can say has not made a net positive contribution to the forum. You have "wasted time" being passive-aggressive to many members on this forum, offering nothing. When you have actually stated a definitive opinion on a subject you have been found wanting.Originally Posted by Words
Haha you really like to create drama don't you. Just fuck off and stop hating on people and you might find your own experiences and impressions of what people do might change. Although I think there is something wrong with you, i'm putting it out there for your advice just in case there's hope.
Yeah, a protracted war amongst gammas seems pretty pointless.
You're the one churning out the insults and the unsubstantiated claims...and have a history of doing so.
Like I said, sadly the case for you.
subt and words can you please stop talking to each other.
A person would only need to compare our last 20 or 40 posts to see if your claims have any weight.
Subt. He retracted his claims, and you still went with it, and turned it into an attack upon his character. I see you as first at fault, and so nothing else after that matters. There's no meant getting into any kind of debate about it. It won't help anything- and I would see it in your best interests to maintain any degree of class, to apologise to Words for your actions and continue onwards.
I would have let it pass if he hadn't then replied to you by saying:
...reaffirming his deleted post and showing that could not provide evidence for his claims.
Also, he may have deleted his initial post but it does not then mean he suddenly does not have this savage mindset that he has always demonstrated.
Let it go.
Inferred type distribution according to Rod:
Oh great that you have added this ridiculous chart, how anyone can believe these heavily biased stupidsonics is hilarious.
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
These type distributions are fucking atrocious, just for the record.
I'm neutral, but what do people find so atrocious about these type distributions?
I don't really get what the issue is if someone has a bunch of typings which apparently disagree with most others. Why does it matter? It's not like you can prove any one of them anyway.
The main reason would be that Rod's stats run contrary to the stats collated by "other" socionists which show a more balanced distribution. A secondary reason, as Rick has said before, would be that such an uneven distribution would mean that most people would have little chance of ending up in long-term relationships with their duals (this is an argument about why our genes bother with personality traits and how they are inherited in a way that is advantageous to our species). Thirdly, I think people would find that 83.47% of females being perceiving types, 82.33% of females being "emotional" types, and 22.45% of men being "Intellectual" "Emotional" types does not come close to their own experiences.
To emphasise these points, having an implied figure of 40.78% of females being SEE + 22.60% of them being SEI, and 25.61% of males being SLI and 23.84% being SLE seems especially absurd to me.
Last edited by Not A Communist Shill; 07-13-2014 at 12:43 PM.
It's the way in which they are distributed and the reasoning behind them. For example one person of such and such "rare" type believes themselves to be superior (not unlike white supremacy and etc) and then takes it upon themselves to bestow all other types with new types according to how they fit into their pyramid of hierarchy. It is incredibly offensive to argue against ones self typing and insist they are a 'lesser' type in the re-typers eyes. Hope that makes sense. Not to mention how fundamentally flawed the whole thing is. It is not difficult to see how types are distributed in various areas... internet typology forums tend to have more introverted and intuitive type distributions... for obvious reasons.
Now this is a story all about how, my type got changed, turned upside down. Just wait for a minute and watch chatbox right there, & I'll tell how Gem became the moderator with blue hair.
In typology central friended and praised, on the picture thread was where she spent most her days. Chilling out, selfies, relaxing all cool, And all typing some people and getting them schooled.
When a couple of girls who were up to no good, Started annoying her & her friends in the forumhood, She got in one little flame war & got pissed off & said 'I'm moving in with that exboyfriend in the forum with the socionics toffs.
So Gem pulls up to the forum for a year without being a hater, And yells to typocentral 'Yo creeps! Smell Ya later', Became a mod in her kingdom she was finally there, To sit on her throne as the mod with blue hair.
InvisibruJim
I dunno but Mr Jung said F types were predominantly females in his chapter 10 what-ever-it-is.
Anyway you are sounding a bit like this is a religion - we don't need to do group consensus to enforce behaviour. Also re Ricks point - something discussed recently on chatbox is that marriages have been predominantly a business contract, whether it was to exchange a daughter for cattle, land, money or a mutual support ie arranged marriages this stuff is quite the norm and you don't need your dual for that. Infact plently people appear to dislike certain members of their dual or quadra group if their typings are 'right'.
That's an interesting point. I suppose if there are biological differences in a species there could also be psychology related differences, just which ones are more favourable or not should influence their chances of being duplicated.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
