.
.
Last edited by Vex; 02-03-2021 at 01:38 AM.
Socionics is a dangerous thing for a woman like me to have, but I have it.
I wonder why socionics is different in that regard? Regardless, I have a couple IEE friends so if someone here wants to type me as that I'll take it as a compliment, because all the IEEs that I know are fun & chill. People on the forum really entertaining themselves talking about me. Hilarious that that's really what people spend their day doing when I wasn't even originally in this convo.
@Vex @SnatchYourWeave why y'all have such an interest in me?
Also, @FreelancePoliceman thought I seemed Se valuing in private conversation, so it's not just @sbbds opinion.
Are SLE/SEE's supposed to like drama? I'm not that type of girl regardless of type. It's why I mostly steer clear of women, or at least the type that like to be clique-ish.
But if y'all need something to do, carry on.
What about it is nonsensical? I’ve provided proof when asked for it. I’m certain I’ve asked for proof from others at points before too. Even if I hadn’t, you’re free to explain how that would confer being hypocritical.
Um.. I didn’t go out of my way to look or search, actually. It’s just common sense that they’re going to be there out of 200 posts on this forum.Odd that you're obsessed enough to look for these posts (which I've mentioned multiple times, but you keep passively aggressively ignoring, that she's meticulously deleted to project a certain image), but I can't be bothered to search for any
It’s odd that you’d assume I’d have done that or to describe someone as “meticulously deleting something to project a certain image”. I literally don’t understand where these impressions about her are coming from (hence the 4D Ne typing), which is my motivation for asking you for examples.
You seem to think being asked for concrete proof on a discussion forum is “surreal” and “nonsensical”...You asked for reasoning and I gave it in 2 or so posts. It must have been good, because after that you've been hung up on "evidence" ever since because you know it isn't there, and you've since dragged it out by asking all these nonsensical questions that border on surreal. And now you're trying to pin the mess you made on me. You started the discussion, I responded since I was trying to get clarification. But you bastardized it with all these nonsensical questions.
In any case, I don't think people are "supposed to be convinced" by what I say. I mean, I did put effort into what I wrote, but I'm not treating it like law. It's just my line of thinking regarding Valued 4D Ne and Demo Ne, as someone who is usually typed as EIE. If people don't agree with my typing of her, all is well, but I hope the information I typed up can at least provide some insight into the differences between 4D Ne.
I did think your reasoning was potentially sound, which is exactly why I asked for something concrete to reference it with. Otherwise all I have to go off of is your own (or our own) impressions and memories, which are of course going to be biased.
No. I’m showing you that you need to be able to back up arguments about people with evidence in general. Obviously I didn’t question that those posts at one point existed. What I’m questioning is your memory of specific interactions, which are bound to be biased, which you’re basing your opinions on.
Stop, I can only get so aroused from the sheer tension in this thread
“I want the following word: splendor, splendor is fruit in all its succulence, fruit without sadness. I want vast distances. My savage intuition of myself.”
― Clarice Lispector
I didn't meticulously erase certain posts. I did want my type me threads gone, because I was done with them & not looking to be typed. I just deleted as many posts as I could, before I stopped to do other things irl. I wanted to mainly be done with the forum & was trying to erase my entire existence on here, for the most part.
imo my ENFP guy friend is way more "metaphorical" than me.. but ok..
Okay, so you are upset about making highly specific negative assessments of people based on your memory, and being asked for *some* kind of objective evidence about them. Any at all. You can’t provide it, and yet stay on your high horse and continue to call others passive aggressive and meticulously image-curating, among other things, framing others as being in the wrong.
Not sure what the bolded is getting at but sounds personal and d33p. Interesting IMO to not care about concrete proof/evidence while being Se valuing, although I guess it’s probably as much if not more about Te.
It’s not bull. What’s bull is making specific negative evaluations of people without evidence and trying to pass off as not talking out of your ass, and being uppity about being called out for this in general. This is what I’m talking about, re LMFAO:
^ From the Unofficial Members Pictures thread
I’m glad you could finally directly admit this and cut through the bull.Even now, you're still going on about the damn "evidence" when I've told you there is none on the site that applies to what I said.
You could have found posts of hers currently existing that would have hinted at this behavior though, or at least provided a better argument on why you think she would have “meticulously deleted her posts to create an image”.... these are highly specific assessments which you aren’t backing up at all here. What you are doing is being toxic and passive-aggressive. It doesn’t register to you as something wrong.
It’s usually related to past personal issues/triggers and to boredom lol. I know, I hate stalkers.
You should change your name from @SadParty to StalkerParty. LOL
I wonder why.
I’m glad I could make you angry after I made you laugh.I just got beyond aggravated with how sbbds got chaotic with the circular and nonsensical "evidence" reasoning. I think people are missing that.
I wonder why you think “people are missing” that but it might be like why you think people are “missing” other things you think exist.
Just like I’ll believe you’re referencing real things about SadParty deflecting others’ logic (and somehow doing this without logic herself??), even though the evidence got deleted. And just like you could see other things like the above so well too.I'll believe SadParty if she says she deleted the posts since she said she didn't want to be on the site. I didn't see the post on the previous page when I was arguing with sb.
This thread got hella derailed. Guess this thread has become my new type me thread, without me making it so. Regardless (however it was intentioned) I don't see being an Ne dom as an insult.
@Vex If by “typo” you are going to be as petty to point out how I wrote “like like” instead of “be like”, you must not mind sharing that it would have been incredibly retarded of you to be unable to figure the meaning out for yourself.
I’m typing from my phone on a 56kbps connection.
Anyway, you have consistently been making posts containing negative comments towards or about SadParty / LMFAO, saying things like “she would try to bend people's argument's against each other without really using structure or logic, more to deflect things and keep herself entertained” and “she's meticulously deleted [posts] to project a certain image”. That you deny them as being negative or critical doesn’t change the fact that they are being seen as such by others. You don’t seem to have any proof to back up your opinions. You’re free to your own opinions, but to constantly keep bringing them up with negative comments in unrelated threads could be construed as bullying.
Tbh my interest in socionics doesn't come from a romantic interest standpoint. I also wouldn't be purposely seeking out my dual, like it seems like many people on this forum do. It is an interesting way to analyze the people around me & have a better understanding of someone's thought processes, but I'm not using it as a way to spot & seek out a certain type. It does let me better understand the people I do come into contact with, though. I actually prefer people a lot more similar to myself. I do enjoy watching YouTube videos of dual couples though, just to see what the interaction is like.
So someone who wants to play with everyone with their own rules is Fi creative. This seems like fractured viewpoint already. So I fail to see why they would like lead masses in first place as their own goal.
The role of diplomat or politician (SEE)/psychologist or advicer (IEE).
MOTTO: NEVER TRUST IN REALITY
Winning is for losers
Sincerely yours,
idiosyncratic type
Life is a joke but do you have a life?
Joinif you dare https://matrix.to/#/#The16Types:matrix.org
You can’t even give any reference as to why you think negatively about someone, and on top of that, it was your *only* reason for typing her Ne leading that you gave. So of course providing evidence for that if asked is relevant in a type argument. If you are unable to provide it, that’s your bad, not mine.
You were the first one to offer criticisms. I obviously didn’t ask for them, so I’m not sure why you’d try framing me for those, and yourself, the criticizer, as having clean hands here. Oh wait, because you’re toxic and gross, I remember.
And if you idealize anything too much, I don't think it's healthy. Seems like it could lead to disappointment too. I find it more useful to understand why misunderstandings happen between people irl &/or improve upon different functions yourself. Along with other things too, of course. Some dual couples are definitely adorable.
No u.
I asked for your thoughts. I was genuinely curious. That’s not asking for negative opinions though.
If you give negative opinions related to type, you should be able to back them up, period. Not be dismissive and show no remorse for it.
Otherwise, it’s easy to use type as an excuse to make shitty judgments of others.
I’m glad you’re trying harder to make friends now though. Hopefully it’s genuine this time.
Dude, you can’t fake cognition. I’ve seen plenty of your posts and you don’t make any attempts at theory analysis which is a big part of Ti but frame your arguments based your personal impressions and relationship to others which is Fi. SLE have PoLR Fi and don’t use Fi to frame nor justify their reasoning. You typed LMFAO based off of relating to her, which is an Fi thing. That’s called card stacking. You vaguely said you’ve been on this forum for 10 years and no one has typed you an NF, implying that the silence of laypersons not contesting your SLE typing is “proof” of your claim. That’s a logical fallacy, argumentum ex silentio. I know I cornered you when I brought up your weird over-investment in defending LMFAO’s Se typing as a telltale you’re defending your typing. I know you were trying to cover your tracks because you made strong claims you relate to her and she must be your type. Then you attempt to shift the burden of proof to anyone who challenges LMAFO as an Se type. You shifted the burden of proof to me that somehow it’s my job to disprove you’re SLE when there’s no evidence that you are SLE to begin with. That’s two more annoying logical fallacy you’ve made, including argument from ignorance.
I know I’ve frustrated you when you started your appeal to hypocrisy by making the snide comment about my tattoos in relation to my typing. I know you were implying that I’m doing the same thing as you and that I’ve self-type myself as SLE and catered my image to fit the “badass” stereotype. That made me laugh at your desperate attempt at grasping straws by deflecting. Unlike most people on this forum, I’ve already been professionally typed. I was typed at the start of this year by WSS. Sol asked me to post a typing video and I posted the link to it. So no, SLE isn’t my self-typing, it’s really my type from an objective, reputable socionist. You can look for it and see if my upper body tattoos were there or not. Since you deal better with speculative info rather than direct, HINT: the last time I was tattooed was 4 years ago and it wasn’t on anywhere visible. I first got exposed to Socionics 10 months ago. Do the math.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Look, I don’t care what type you are or what LMFAO is or what anyone’s type is. I didn’t want to say anything from the beginning because I could tell you both would deflect, obfuscate, and play victim if direct honesty and structure is demanded. And sure enough this is the mess. I get it, this forum consists almost wholly of hobbyists so there’s a lot of stereotypical info being passed around. Attacking Vex wasn’t cool either, especially since she sincerely took a lot of time to explain her reasoning based in cognitive theory which you both purposely buck and dismiss.
Online typology forums is rifled with mistypes. My main source of frustration stems from the fact that most people don’t understand the purpose behind typology, let alone how to honestly self-type. The general reasoning for cognitive typology is actually simple- to explore your mind and understand yourself. This is merely a tool for self-improvement but the reality of typology is extremely brutal. It’s meant to strip away your defenses and expose your weaknesses, because problems arise for the individual due to their weaknesses, not from strengths. The layperson almost always uses typology (of any sort) to coddle and validate their fixations of delusions rather than work on throwing away their delusions. The utility of typology ends up being abused and mishandled as a security blanket. So then I ask, what’s the point? Why bother learning bits and pieces of theory just to morph it to bolster your ego if you want to be any type of your choosing? That’s dishonest and illogical. You can lie to yourself but don’t pass off your lies to others.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok, if you’re aware of my typing is from a reputable outside source, why act like my typing was self-typed like yours? More blame shifting and avoidance of the issue. You threw off the photo topic by making wrong inferences and twisting my words about what I said about duality and kept pressing me to explain myself.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I didn’t ever say it was only a self-typing? Why do you think I acted like it was?
Notice that some other people liked my posts in there where I was trying to ask you to explain yourself. I don’t think my inferences were unreasonable at all. I didn’t even disagree with you, I just said I had different experiences at the end.
In fact I liked some of your posts in there, and was one of the first if not the first to like your photo post in there, while I noted that you didn’t even like mine. I’ve liked some of your posts elsewhere on the forum too. Even though you’ve exploded at me multiple times with textwalls like this and typed me EII (lol), I’ve been cordial to you. My comment about tattoos wasn’t personal, it was to highlight possible contradictoriness with regard to what you said about others’ values. I’m not sure where you’re imagining ill will from me, but if you’re going to continue being like this and replying to me to get my attention, I’m just going to block you.
Also, I don’t think Jack Oliver Aaron is infallible either, though I do agree with most of his typings and like him as a person.