Your typing of forum members

[The Reality Denialist]

Yes.  i have never seen a persistent dude.

Maybe I'll just be an EIE only for him.

Good, because Solsionics is a very serious science.

[Sol]

Good, because Solsionics is a very serious science.

the colleague, I appreciate that in Trollsionics what I do is seen as a science


P.S. From the modesty point, I'm just the best one. My IR test even worked sometimes as should. It helped several people to accept my opinion about their type. But... in general I will not be thanked for what I did. *sigh*

[Myst]

No one fuckin cares

As long as you are on this forum, you care.

You and I are definitely not on the same page, and this is about the only thing I agree with you on here.

I do not have an "IEI pov," and your insistent and stubborn need to repeat this beaten and dead horse of yours is what makes it impossible for you to understand my point. I was not speaking from my type, I was discussing Ti and Te. But seeing that you can't help yourself from being a pain in the ass about my type, I have lost any and all interest in discussing anything regarding theory with you.

The constant miscommunication between you and I is proof in itself that we are not Activity partners. Get a clue. I have experienced Activity relation, this is not it. Reading the other person's argument and completely failing to understand its point, every single time we interact - no exception, is NOT Activity. It is not even the same Quadra. This isn't about a disagreement in theory either, this is rooted in an inherently flawed communication style between us. A flaw that is so great that it prohibits any fruitful interaction between the parties involved. Socionics accounts for this in its theory, and it is not you being LSI and me being IEI, that's for sure.

Activity relations actually do get quite conflict heavy here and there. The descriptions of IEI/LSI Activity relations note this too.

You do have an IEI pov pretty much about how you view Ti. The discussion itself was not about your type but if you are unable to let go of the type topic, then that won't help. And yeah, you are unfortunately not getting my point about Ti vs Te. So yeah, best to stop discussing this with you while you are too emotional about it.

[Myst]

She does that with everybody tho. Its always her pov and everything is discarded, kinda like with sol too xd

Look into yourself first before you criticize others about this.

[Dee]

I self type as an unknown type, most often typed as iei, sei, ese, eii. Blessings.

[Delilah]

while I'm far from taking seriously Reinin's traits and from trusting to how people percieve own types traits

> these are the types I feel closer to: ESI, IEE, and less likely EII.

it's better to understand which types you like more as to use IR theory. my bloggers examples may help you

I have in fact used IR as well, and that together with Reinin led me to consider the types that i mention. Reinin is just another way of expressing classical concepts, except practicing it is based on observable traits so i'd say it offers an advantage.

Dynamic /Static is a basic dichotomy, whereby you differentiate Je and Ji.

[Sol]

Dynamic /Static is a basic dichotomy

the basic and only deserving the usage are Jung's dichotomies
Reinin's traits are baseless hypothesis. at least, they have lesser priority

[Delilah]

the basic and only deserving the usage are Jung's dichotomies
Reinin's traits are baseless hypothesis. at least, they have lesser priority

That's fine, we come from different schools of thought on this. For me Reinin at least attempted to make observable Ti concepts that we could otherwise only hope to discern by using a Ti lense, which didn't work for me.

As for IR, i'd like to point out that IR is a Ti concept that an ILE (Aushra sp?) came up with in trying to make sense of failed relationships.

[Samson]

Activity relations actually do get quite conflict heavy here and there. The descriptions of IEI/LSI Activity relations note this too.

You do have an IEI pov pretty much about how you view Ti. The discussion itself was not about your type but if you are unable to let go of the type topic, then that won't help. And yeah, you are unfortunately not getting my point about Ti vs Te. So yeah, best to stop discussing this with you while you are too emotional about it.

You suck at typing people, including yourself. And for the record, it was YOU who couldn't drop the discussion of my type, when I was trying to focus on the actual topic. I even let your passive-aggressive remarks - you calling my post "Fe" - go because I wasn't interested in this bullshit circle-jerk that you pull me in time and time again.

Having conflict is irrelevant when it comes to inter-type relations. It's the TYPE OF CONFLICT and the fact that you and I can't communicate whatsoever that should give you a clue, but you're so stuck up your ass about bringing your idea of my type up constantly that you fail to even THINK about the possibility that your own bias is clouding your mind.

At least my emotional bias is upfront and I don't hide behind these petty games that you play. Fuck off with your BULLSHIT.

[Number 9 large]

Look into yourself first before you criticize others about this.

Y u hev 2 b mad

[Starvish]

Been wondering if I'm Fi or Fe. Pretty sure I'm some F type, but idk about which.

[niffer]

Sometimes I wonder if you’re an ESI actually @Mio Q , not to throw yet another suggestion at you.

[Myst]

You suck at typing people, including yourself. And for the record, it was YOU who couldn't drop the discussion of my type, when I was trying to focus on the actual topic. I even let your passive-aggressive remarks - you calling my post "Fe" - go because I wasn't interested in this bullshit circle-jerk that you pull me in time and time again.

Having conflict is irrelevant when it comes to inter-type relations. It's the TYPE OF CONFLICT and the fact that you and I can't communicate whatsoever that should give you a clue, but you're so stuck up your ass about bringing your idea of my type up constantly that you fail to even THINK about the possibility that your own bias is clouding your mind.

At least my emotional bias is upfront and I don't hide behind these petty games that you play. Fuck off with your BULLSHIT.

My noting your type or about Fe was not passive aggressive. Do not distort the facts - the fact is, I was focusing on the actual topic, sharing my analysis of the actual topic of Ti vs Te.

Anyway, I see you are still being too emotional and personal to discuss with reasonably. Not playing any games here. I just simply do not see any point to it while you are like this.

[Starvish]

Sometimes I wonder if you’re an ESI actually

I haven't heard that before. I'll weigh it in!

[golden]

My noting your type or about Fe was not passive aggressive. Do not distort the facts - the fact is, I was focusing on the actual topic, sharing my analysis of the actual topic of Ti vs Te.

Anyway, I see you are still being too emotional and personal to discuss with reasonably. Not playing any games here. I just simply do not see any point to it while you are like this.

Tho you are often very straightforward, when you referred categorically to the other person as a type they don’t accept, it was a communication move that I have seen with PA forum members such as Maritsa. It’s PA Bc it leaves the other person quietly boxed in. The only option for them apart from accepting it unhappily is to back up and call it out rather than just be able to respond directly to overt content. It will upset many people. It crosses a respect boundary. I know you didn’t mean to.

I can find the specific pivotal quote if you like. Hard to do atm Bc I may have broken my wrist, wtf. :/

[Sol]

some comments about the possibility of @niffer to be SLE

and there which own types she thought previously

also it's very useful to see this severe "SLE" on photos

[niffer]

some comments about the possibility of @niffer to be SLE

and there which own types she thought previously

also it's very useful to see this severe "SLE" on photos

Okay lol. Let me add without people have to click before they read the same thing that I’ve only ever seriously considered myself to be SLE under socionics.

You’re so incredibly stupid and bullheaded though that if you wanted me to be your conflictor I wouldn’t mind that. No matter what your own type is too.

[Myst]

Tho you are often very straightforward, when you referred categorically to the other person as a type they don’t accept, it was a communication move that I have seen with PA forum members such as Maritsa. It’s PA Bc it leaves the other person quietly boxed in. The only option for them apart from accepting it unhappily is to back up and call it out rather than just be able to respond directly to overt content. It will upset many people. It crosses a respect boundary. I know you didn’t mean to.

I can find the specific pivotal quote if you like. Hard to do atm Bc I may have broken my wrist, wtf. :/

Thanks for the input on this & for describing how it might affect some people in a bad way. Yeah no, I don't try to create such games. The problem I have in this area is that I sometimes do think it would be possibly useful information to the other person if I mention to them my reasoning on type, but sure I realize it may not always be helpful, especially if referring to observations inside the Socionics framework when that might create issues about self-identification or this "boxing in" or any other issue (I'm not clear on what else it could be). It would be good to find a way to discuss some observations and analyses without involving any further such issues that I did not mean to touch on/cause.

EDIT: In the specific case as above, the problem might've actually been that I spoke of "lack of logical consistency" (and that was linked to type as cognition for that type). I was not intending to call the person stupid or incompetent in life in general, no, I just meant that if they do not care about having all theories/explanations consistent with each other then that means a lack of logical consistency, and I meant this in terms of preference: some people just do not seem to need much consistency of such to be able to solve problems and to adapt to situations in life. It's simply a statement on a way of thinking/cognition. But I realize this wording by default has an unfortunate connotation of "you are stupid". I was not thinking of that connotation when I wrote that earlier because I was inside the context of Socionics theory so it was a technical statement entirely like explained above.

And yes, if you want to find that specific pivotal quote (not sure what you are referrring to here), do feel free to. Hope your wrist isn't actually broken.

[Samson]

My noting your type or about Fe was not passive aggressive. Do not distort the facts - the fact is, I was focusing on the actual topic, sharing my analysis of the actual topic of Ti vs Te.

Anyway, I see you are still being too emotional and personal to discuss with reasonably. Not playing any games here. I just simply do not see any point to it while you are like this.

Your Fe comments were bullshit and unsubstantiated. If you do as you claim, then there would have been a point to those remarks, and you would provide actual reason to back up those hollow claims. Instead, they are off handed comments that you repeat like some slogan as if you are some sleazy salesman selling soap, with nothing to back em up. This is class-A bullshit aimed at nothing but to aggravate me. Congrats, you "succeeded."

You continue playing games right now. You disagree but your own actions speak for themselves.

And "while you are like this," that's right. I am like "this," meaning that I just do not put up with this nonsense. Be straight forward or fuck off. You were the one to make it personal to begin with, so put your money where your mouth is.

[niffer]

Your Fe comments were bullshit and unsubstantiated. If you do as you claim, then there would have been a point to those remarks, and you would provide actual reason to back up those hollow claims. Instead, they are off handed comments that you repeat like some slogan as if you are some sleazy salesman selling soap, with nothing to back em up. This is class-A bullshit aimed at nothing but to aggravate me. Congrats, you "succeeded."

You continue playing games right now. You disagree but your own actions speak for themselves.

And "while you are like this," that's right. I am like "this," meaning that I just do not put up with this nonsense. Be straight forward or fuck off. You were the one to make it personal to begin with, so put your money where your mouth is.

Are you mentally retarded?

[Samson]

EDIT: In the specific case as above, the problem might've actually been that I spoke of "lack of logical consistency" (and that was linked to type as cognition for that type). I was not intending to call the person stupid or incompetent in life in general, no, I just meant that if they do not care about having all theories/explanations consistent with each other then that means a lack of logical consistency, and I meant this in terms of preference: some people just do not seem to need much consistency of such to be able to solve problems and to adapt to situations in life. It's simply a statement on a way of thinking/cognition. But I realize this wording by default has an unfortunate connotation of "you are stupid". I was not thinking of that connotation when I wrote that earlier because I was inside the context of Socionics theory so it was a technical statement entirely like explained above.

If you are referring to me with "the person," then you are wrong about everything that follows. I am of the thought that there is only one "true" system, and that the perceived distinction between the interpretations is exactly that: a difference in interpretation and nothing more.

Your insistent claim of me being an IEI is based on a falsehood.

[Samson]

Are you mentally retarded?

Who the fuck are you?

[niffer]

If you are referring to me with "the person," then you are wrong about everything that follows. I am of the thought that there is only one "true" system, and that the perceived distinction between the interpretations is exactly that: a difference in interpretation and nothing more.

Your insistent claim of me being an IEI is based on a falsehood.

If you’re really an ESI you’re the worst excuse of one I’ve ever seen in my life. Your girlfriend you had on here before was a good example of one.

[Samson]

If you’re really an ESI you’re the worst excuse of one I’ve ever seen in my life. Your girlfriend you had on here before was a good example of one.

Again, who the fuck are​ you?

[niffer]

Again, who the fuck are​ you?

I made fun of you and the gf you had before for being goth kids. Remember?

[Samson]

I made fun of you and the gf you had before for being goth kids. Remember?

No. And looking at the quality of your posts, I am not surprised.

[niffer]

No. And looking at the quality of your posts, I am not surprised.

From the instinct subtypes thread.

Demonstrative Si types usually have a better memory than this.

[Samson]

From the instinct subtypes thread.

Demonstrative Si types usually have a better memory than this.

I don't care.

Bully someone else.

[niffer]

I don't care.

Bully someone else.

This one: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...(thread-split)

You’re supposed to supervise me lol. “Bully someone else” doesn’t sound very aggressor-like :/

[Samson]

This one: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...(thread-split)

You’re supposed to supervise me lol. “Bully someone else” doesn’t sound very aggressor-like :/

There is no challenge.

And stop creeping up on me. Fucking stalker.

Edit; Ah, that thread. So you're a troll. Great. Fuck off.

[niffer]

There is no challenge except for your mental challenges.

[Myst]

Your Fe comments were bullshit and unsubstantiated. If you do as you claim, then there would have been a point to those remarks, and you would provide actual reason to back up those hollow claims. Instead, they are off handed comments that you repeat like some slogan as if you are some sleazy salesman selling soap, with nothing to back em up. This is class-A bullshit aimed at nothing but to aggravate me. Congrats, you "succeeded."

You continue playing games right now. You disagree but your own actions speak for themselves.

And "while you are like this," that's right. I am like "this," meaning that I just do not put up with this nonsense. Be straight forward or fuck off. You were the one to make it personal to begin with, so put your money where your mouth is.

I'm not actually sure what you call "Fe comments" here, clarify. I was mentioning that your Ti description seemed like from an IEI (and Ni) pov, I did not say anything about you as an Fe type directly actually. That is, I was not emphasizing Fe here, while you are. So, yeah, clarification is needed.

Because right now it just looks like you are angry at something I did not even say or imply. And I was never less than straightforward. You are being paranoid about that.

If you are referring to me with "the person," then you are wrong about everything that follows. I am of the thought that there is only one "true" system, and that the perceived distinction between the interpretations is exactly that: a difference in interpretation and nothing more.

Your insistent claim of me being an IEI is based on a falsehood.

Yes, I was referring to you. As for your claim here that there is only one true system, your original post I was responding to a while ago was about "The view that these theories are each valid within their own theoretical internal structure, separate from one another in its validity - yet with obvious links to each other that ought to not be taken into account when discussing each operational segment - is that of Ti. It separates theory from reality, as any introverted attitude will do, allowing the theory to develop and live on its own, mutating into a different form depending on its 'author' (the Ti type thinking of it). Consequently this becomes yet another separate child of the mother of theories, but one that can't be reconciled with the origin because too many fundamentals have been altered. Abstract theory that lives its own life. As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child. This is the opposite from a pragmatic outlook, making this line of thinking not Te." And I was responding to this kind of view, while it seemed like this was your line of thinking as well. If not, that's cool by me, I have no investment in your type either BTW. But your view on Ti seemed really Ni-laden while ignoring important properties of how Ti reasoning is, so that's why I even brought it up in the first place (remembering that I saw some other posts of yours earlier and they seemed IEI).

[Samson]

I'm not actually sure what you call "Fe comments" here, clarify. I was mentioning that your Ti description seemed like from an IEI (and Ni) pov, I did not say anything about you as an Fe type directly actually. That is, I was not emphasizing Fe here, while you are. So, yeah, clarification is needed.

Gotcha. Clarification inbound:

Lol - nice Fe performance.

IEIs do tell me they perceive abstract structures. What you described is Irrational and opposing Se also because "As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child."

The first mention of IEI, and not at all what I was discussing.

Maybe it's due to your IEI pov? IEIs do ignore logical consistency pretty often compared to LxI.

Uncalled for and completely disconnected from the topic at hand.

Following your own logic, this would then also apply to me:

Also, one-fit-for-all is just LSI's Ne PoLR.

... because a "one-fit-for-all" is how I think. And this includes topics such as typology. If you must place me in the Beta quadra, your own logic would suggest LSI.

Yes, I was referring to you. As for your claim here that there is only one true system, your original post I was responding to a while ago was about "The view that these theories are each valid within their own theoretical internal structure, separate from one another in its validity - yet with obvious links to each other that ought to not be taken into account when discussing each operational segment - is that of Ti. It separates theory from reality, as any introverted attitude will do, allowing the theory to develop and live on its own, mutating into a different form depending on its 'author' (the Ti type thinking of it). Consequently this becomes yet another separate child of the mother of theories, but one that can't be reconciled with the origin because too many fundamentals have been altered. Abstract theory that lives its own life. As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child. This is the opposite from a pragmatic outlook, making this line of thinking not Te."

Lol, the bolded there was never my claim. I was contrasting two approaches to typology and trying to discuss them with you, but alas it was all for naught.

If you still don't understand this, then I challenge you to quote me saying that the "separate theories"-approach is the one I employ. You won't find it because I never said it.

[Bertrand]

I had this out with Myst a long time ago Samson... I think you're right, but realize its totally pointless, still, you're not alone (i was literally saying exactly the same stuff). Myst is harmless and kind of lovable once you just accept she's super in her own world

also niffer tries to insert herself in every possible controversy but its totally superfluous you can cut out 99% of her input too with no loss. Myst whatever her faults may be I don't think generates conflict or misunderstanding intentionally

[Myst]

Gotcha. Clarification inbound:

Lol - nice Fe performance.

Are you trying to tell me you got offended at this? Your original response to this did not seem to be in an offended tone ("Pff, you ain't seen nothin yet!").

And BTW it was not meant to be some "insistent typing" of you to "aggravate" you, it was meant as a compliment lol.

IEIs do tell me they perceive abstract structures. What you described is Irrational and opposing Se also because "As a result, you can be a Fe type based on Jung's, and a Ne type based on a disconnected-from-reality Ti child."

The first mention of IEI, and not at all what I was discussing.

Uncalled for and completely disconnected from the topic at hand.

It was not disconnected from the topic at hand, since I wanted to find an explanation for why you'd view Ti in that way you described it.

I absolutely did not mean it in a personal way, if you have a beef with being typed as IEI, that doesn't mean I will be automatically aware of that. So no, I was not trying to "aggravate" you with it.

Following your own logic, this would then also apply to me:

... because a "one-fit-for-all" is how I think. And this includes topics such as typology. If you must place me in the Beta quadra, your own logic would suggest LSI.

Cool ok whatever you mean by "one-fit-for-all" here, but you do not think of Ti the same way LSI does, according to your earlier descriptions.

Lol, that was never my claim. I was contrasting two approaches to typology and trying to discuss them with you, but alas it was all for naught.

If you still don't understand this, then I challenge you to quote me saying that the "separate theories"-approach is the one I employ. You won't find it because I never said it.

My point was that you seemed to be approaching the understanding of what Ti is through the Ni of IEIs. Just according to my experience. No, you didn't say you employ it, otherwise.

[Samson]

Are you trying to tell me you got offended at this? Your original response to this did not seem to be in an offended tone ("Pff, you ain't seen nothin yet!").

And BTW it was not meant to be some "insistent typing" of you to "aggravate" you, it was meant as a compliment lol.

--
I absolutely did not mean it in a personal way, if you have a beef with being typed as IEI, that doesn't mean I will be automatically aware of that. So no, I was not trying to "aggravate" you with it.

Alright, it wasn't personal then.

I don't have beef with being typed IEI, I have 'beef' with being retyped on the wrong basis, on claims that never existed. It made me wonder if we were discussing theory (the topic) or if all this was some power-play for my typing that ignores anything I say or do.

Cool ok whatever you mean by "one-fit-for-all" here, but you do not think of Ti the same way LSI does, according to your earlier descriptions.

The one we had been employing throughout the initial attempt at discussion, that's the idea I used for "one-fit-for-all." There was none other discussed.
I know that I am not LSI, that wasn't my point. My point is that your own reasoning supports me being Ne PoLR, and directly opposes IEI for me.

My point was that you seemed to be approaching the understanding of what Ti is through the Ni of IEIs. Just according to my experience. No, you didn't say you employ it, otherwise.

In that case, the logical assumption to make would be that my understanding of Ti comes from my interactions with IEI's, whom I must have mistaken for high Ti users. Not that I myself would be one as I don't employ that type of reasoning.

[Sol]

I know that I am not LSI, that wasn't my point.

You think. To know you may only the objective. Opinions about types are far from this still.
Your talking style is funny, in case it's ESI indeed. So much of bad words and incline to quarrels. The base Fi I knew personally behaved other - they were more passive aggressive, while you oppose openly and easily.

[niffer]

I had this out with Myst a long time ago Samson... I think you're right, but realize its totally pointless, still, you're not alone (i was literally saying exactly the same stuff). Myst is harmless and kind of lovable once you just accept she's super in her own world

also niffer tries to insert herself in every possible controversy but its totally superfluous you can cut out 99% of her input too with no loss. Myst whatever her faults may be I don't think generates conflict or misunderstanding intentionally

You should cut off 99% of the stuff on your head.

[Aramas]

@niffer: SEI-Fe

That is all for now.

@Bertrand: What do you think of this type for her?

[niffer]

@niffer: SEI-Fe

That is all for now.

@Bertrand: What do you think of this type for her?

Please.... a hobo would have their Si sensibilities obliterated by it too if you showed it to them.