53% is "barely most" actually. it's a fact
Also people who vote on forums and alike are just random people, the most of which are not supposed to have good typing skills and have high conformism.
For voting is more useful the matches between those who creates own types lists of famouses. Among Russian sites such was SSS, which does not work as should in last time. Mb there are other similar bases about Jung types of famouses. Such votings are also not good due to similar reasons, which just have lesser degree than more random people on forums.
Also would be interesting to know what people think independently, before knowing others' opinions. But it's hard to get such data about famouses.
> Te is so manipulative
Your incorrectness related mostly to Ti - formal term about the majority. While Te helped to notice the practical sense of the real value.
You said alike there is significant "most" with same opinion, what is wrong. Then you've added additional params which alike disprove that I'm wrong in pointing that the "most" has no significant expression - and here you was wrong again. After you being wrong 2 times you claim that it's me who said wrong.
The manipulative is your F ego, which leads to worse understanding of T themes and such to regular mistakes there, and inappropriately expresses emotions in logical questions.
P.S. To suppose S types as good in being creative with new ideas is close to nonsense. Champions as Jobs in a region are almost always have strong that function. It's not enough to reject S type, but enough to highly doubt in it for him. I mostly type by nonverbal impressions and what I feel fits to theory better. Nonverbal approach to people who you know rather limitly and surfacely, and even with doubtful info sometimes, as famouses - is better than anything.
wbr