So, you don't think I am an LIE?

[Retsu77]

So apparently me and you are twins, OP.

How about that? But they say you're not ENTj, so... makes you think...

[Spermatozoa]

So apparently me and you are twins, OP.

How about that? But they say you're not ENTj, so... makes you think...

http://www.sociotype.com/tests/result/ost/38401

[Retsu77]

http://www.sociotype.com/tests/result/ost/38401

What am I to make of this...? Neither you nor others type you as such.

[squark]

So apparently me and you are twins, OP.

How about that? But they say you're not ENTj, so... makes you think...

My impression so far from your posts is LSE, and for Cuiv, Te/Fi extrovert, prob LIE, though the other Te leads saying he's not logical bears some weight too imo. Lots of focus on Te at any rate whichever position its in for him. And none on Ti.

[Retsu77]

My impression so far from your posts is LSE, and for Cuiv, Te/Fi extrovert, prob LIE, though the other Te leads saying he's not logical bears some weight too imo. Lots of focus on Te at any rate whichever position its in for him. And none on Ti.

I'm fine with being LSE, or SLE or even LSI tbh.

[Cosmic Teapot]

The intention is to have eccentric flair with a sexual edge, while still being a little detached and formal.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...d/page18?#1748

his artistic appearance successfully blends with his noble manners. [...]
HAMLET is like a prince. His clothing may vary from professional to extravagant and creative. Among youths of this type you can find those who love decorating their already spectacular appearance.

http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...E_.28Hamlet.29

Pays much attention to his own appearance

http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...ile_by_Gulenko

You won't find that in LIE profiles.

[Number 9 large]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...d/page18?#1748


http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...E_.28Hamlet.29


[/FONT][/COLOR]http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=EIE_Profile_by_Gulenko

You won't find that in LIE profiles.

yeah i still think you should look into EIE @Cuivienen , that was your first typing when you got here and it doesnt necessarily seem to be wrong. and dont worry, ESI women (and for me personally, SEE women) are attractive as a whole, so you shouldnt look too much into it. attraction does not equal psychological compatibility.

[Spermatozoa]

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...d/page18?#1748


http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.p...E_.28Hamlet.29


[/FONT][/COLOR]http://www.wikisocion.net/en/index.php?title=EIE_Profile_by_Gulenko

You won't find that in LIE profiles.

I see that you are German, so you might be interested:

My father is a former army doctor who has travelled abroad, serving first in Germany and then (for money) in the Iraq-Iran War, under Saddam Hussain. He has told me in some authority that German women are hairy like men, moan in a guttural fashion during coitus and are somewhat attracted to strong body odor in a potential mate. They also seem unusually prone to the breaking of wind, and prefer to take a dump in the natural environment, especially behind tussocks or in a musty, secluded gully.

I have confirmed some of these observations myself. In fact, I can show you a stretch of road which is particularly favored by the Continentals for soiling. Here: 45 01 51.62 S, 169 13 32.18 E.

Just in case you ever come this way and want to know where to go, park your slab, go up the shingle road to the right (looking north), and continue until you are behind the bend, at which point your arse will be removed from public view. You can contribute to society and enjoy the scenery at the same time.

[Bertrand]

I can tell your father is right about German women because anyone who could raise such a good son must have word beyond reproach

[idontgiveaf]

What makes you think you're not eie btw? That's the question.

[The Reality Denialist]

To be or not to be.

[Spermatozoa]

What makes you think you're not eie btw? That's the question.

EIEs are not overwhelmingly sexual enough.

[Spermatozoa]

To be or not to be.

Fire when ready.

[darya]

EIEs are not overwhelmingly sexual enough.

SEE's don't intellectualize sexuality - they simply are.

[idontgiveaf]

EIEs are not overwhelmingly sexual enough.

Is that it? SEE stereotype.

So you're believing now on sterotypes?

I know an eie who is very sexual and we used to talk before. Whenever he's about to masturbate he calls me. He's eie. He's very passionate about sex too.

If you're an SEE, you would accept open relationship. But you're too formal.

Don't go on sterotypes. Everybody is horny. Even Bertrand, even Number 9 Large, even Sol, even any guys. The only difference is you're too vocal about it here.

That's all.

[Sol]

EIEs are not overwhelmingly sexual enough.

Generally S types perceive this better. But there are non-types factors too.
Also you may see the behavior, while the level of your wishes may be similar to others. They may just react in other way on same, having better general self-control.
EIE is among possible for you.

[Cosmic Teapot]

I see that you are German, so you might be interested:

My father is a former army doctor who has travelled abroad, serving first in Germany and then (for money) in the Iraq-Iran War, under Saddam Hussain. He has told me in some authority that German women are hairy like men, moan in a guttural fashion during coitus and are somewhat attracted to strong body odor in a potential mate. They also seem unusually prone to the breaking of wind, and prefer to take a dump in the natural environment, especially behind tussocks or in a musty, secluded gully.

I have confirmed some of these observations myself. In fact, I can show you a stretch of road which is particularly favored by the Continentals for soiling. Here: 45 01 51.62 S, 169 13 32.18 E.

Just in case you ever come this way and want to know where to go, park your slab, go up the shingle road to the right (looking north), and continue until you are behind the bend, at which point your arse will be removed from public view. You can contribute to society and enjoy the scenery at the same time.

lol. I didn't know you're so sensitive

[Spermatozoa]

lol. I didn't know you're so sensitive

Hahah, sensitive in what way? I was just drunk last night and felt like saying that for some reason.

At least admit that it was a funny post.

[Spermatozoa]

Is that it? SEE stereotype.

I was being facetious.

So you're believing now on sterotypes?

I know an eie who is very sexual and we used to talk before. Whenever he's about to masturbate he calls me. He's eie. He's very passionate about sex too.

I promise to call you whenever I feel the need to jerk off. No pressure, of course.

If you're an SEE, you would accept open relationship. But you're too formal.

This is a stereotype.

Everybody is horny.

What are you going to do about it?

[Cosmic Teapot]

Hahah, sensitive in what way? I was just drunk last night and felt like saying that for some reason.

At least admit that it was a funny post.

Only when you're in primary school lol

[Spermatozoa]

Only when you're in primary school lol

I thought Caregivers wanted a man whose mind has never left the third grade.

[Cosmic Teapot]

I thought Caregivers wanted a man whose mind has never left the third grade.

Not in your case

[Spermatozoa]

Not in your case

I guess I'm just too much of a challenge for you.

[Number 9 large]

I guess I'm just too much of a challenge for you.

^ Victim

[Retsu77]

I question attempting to type anyone based on romance styles. I mention this briefly in my video.

[Number 9 large]

I question attempting to type anyone based on romance styles. I mention this briefly in my video.

the video that no one will ever see

[Retsu77]

the video that no one will ever see

Maybe it doesn't even exist, who knows?

[Number 9 large]

Maybe it doesn't even exist, who knows?

:ni:

[Bertrand]

I feel like typing people based on romance style, in principle, is not a bad way to facilitate things; but the problem is people have a poor understanding of romance styles such that it just becomes a mess of confusion, because "victim" and "caregiver" etc all mean specific things in terms of the system, and barely, if at all, resemble their colloquial usage. Thus they become fertile ground for projections from people who don't understand the underlying structure of how they came about. It suffers from a similar problem as reinin dichotomies, which is to say some things like "asking/declaring" have a very specific meaning because they don't mean what the common usage means at all, rather they're derived from strict structural implications of mathematically slicing the functions certain ways, and the label is slapped on later as a shorthand for what amounts to a equation. Anyway once you understand what the words truly mean, its extremely insightful, but the problem is people get the horse before the carriage, they take "victim" and define Ni in terms of that they think victim commonly means and thus should evoke in them. Thus they take their projection as the actual meaning to the systemic function, which is totally backwards. This is why you have so many subjective interpretations of many many aspects of socionics, which in turn make socionics out to be hopelessly controversial, but its the underlying process people go through in determining the meaning of socionics that leads to this outcome

the entire point of socionics is to unwind this process, so its always disappointing, although not entirely unexpected, to see it subverted by exactly what it strives to point out and overcome

[Number 9 large]

I feel like typing people based on romance style, in principle, is not a bad way to facilitate things; but the problem is people have a poor understanding of romance styles such that it just becomes a mess of confusion, because "victim" and "caregiver" etc all mean specific things in terms of the system, and barely, if at all, resemble their colloquial usage. Thus they become fertile ground for projections from people who don't understand the underlying structure of how they came about. It suffers from a similar problem as reinin dichotomies, which is to say something like "asking/declaring" have very specific meaning because they don't mean what the common usage means at all, rather they're derived from strict structural implications of mathematically slicing the functions certain ways, and the label is slapped on later as a shorthand for what amounts to a equation. Anyway once you understand what the words truly mean, its extremely insightful, but the problem is people get the horse before the carriage, they take "victim" and define Ni in terms of that they think victim commonly means and thus should evoke in them. Thus they take their projection as the actual meaning to the systemic function, which is totally backwards. This is why you have so many subjective interpretations of many many aspects of socionics, which in turn make socionics out to be hopelessly controversial, but its the underlying process people go through in determining the meaning of socionics that leads to this outcome

the entire point of socionics is to unwind this process, so its always disappointing, although not entirely unexpected, to see it subverted by exactly what it strives to point out and overcome

spoken like true ni HA and ti role

[Bertrand]

law school is really training my role!

dem gainz

[Number 9 large]

law school is really training my role!

dem gainz

never stop gaining brah. do u even fkin lift?

[Bertrand]

my brain lifts, soon i will reach tetsuo mode

[Olimpia]

spoken like true ni HA and ti role

Haha!

[Retsu77]

I feel like typing people based on romance style, in principle, is not a bad way to facilitate things; but the problem is people have a poor understanding of romance styles such that it just becomes a mess of confusion, because "victim" and "caregiver" etc all mean specific things in terms of the system, and barely, if at all, resemble their colloquial usage. Thus they become fertile ground for projections from people who don't understand the underlying structure of how they came about. It suffers from a similar problem as reinin dichotomies, which is to say some things like "asking/declaring" have a very specific meaning because they don't mean what the common usage means at all, rather they're derived from strict structural implications of mathematically slicing the functions certain ways, and the label is slapped on later as a shorthand for what amounts to a equation. Anyway once you understand what the words truly mean, its extremely insightful, but the problem is people get the horse before the carriage, they take "victim" and define Ni in terms of that they think victim commonly means and thus should evoke in them. Thus they take their projection as the actual meaning to the systemic function, which is totally backwards. This is why you have so many subjective interpretations of many many aspects of socionics, which in turn make socionics out to be hopelessly controversial, but its the underlying process people go through in determining the meaning of socionics that leads to this outcome

the entire point of socionics is to unwind this process, so its always disappointing, although not entirely unexpected, to see it subverted by exactly what it strives to point out and overcome

That's because you're an idiot who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

[Number 9 large]

That's because you're an idiot who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

@Bertrand you're getting rekt everytime. Id do something about that

[Bertrand]

story of my life

[Spermatozoa]

@Bertrand you're getting rekt everytime. Id do something about that

What else would you expect from a Fi-ego?

They prefer to receive.

[Retsu77]

What else would you expect from a Fi-ego?

They prefer to receive.

I hate Fi leads. I mentioned this to when speaking about my type.

[Olimpia]

I hate Fi leads. I mentioned this to when speaking about my type.

Haha, ironically no Fi PoLR person would say that.

Fe HA – too concerned with being liked.