Do i look ESI enough? x

[RBRS]

I do not at all believe that this is a "i like them so they must be my dual" typing. We got along perfectly from the moment we met each other and even in spite of that i typed myself (and he typed me) ILI for the longest time. It wasn't until we started video chatting and i opened up more that we both settled for ESI > ILI > any other type.

Then you should understand that we have a very small video sample and know you too little for us to have an accurate assestment on your type (Plus consider what I've said in the previous post, most users here actually type through caricatures of types or likes and dislikes except @Sol for what I've seen). Also I have seen just a video in which I saw a very different thing to what I've experienced with ESI plus ESI's I've seen on video that are practically clones to the ESI male I'm talking about in VI, non-verbal, what they say (Specially the female one). I usually think there's a common "core" to types that can be recognizable but the problem is that the traits and the typings have practically zero empirical proof,and are invalid to be taken seriously, specially after contradictory statements on traits, IM expression or ITR which are measures to core socionics theory claims and thus are more valid.
There you have two videos of what I'm talking about;





As I've said Visual identification lacks validity, VI and non-verbal traits are just mere anecdotal observations that are not verifiable nor definitive (Specially, when anybody can be wrong about being any type as there's still no totally valid methodology on typing, just only competing claims) plus my typing of the male ESI I'm talking plus the typing of the two above mentioned might be wrong, or the traits I'm measuring are not crucial, or I lack enough information on you or I lack the VI capacity for this. I don't have enough info about you nor do I have the best VI abilities to give you a typing as accurate as someone you know more, has more info about you and you even live together thus testing ITR daily. Also take into account that it is perfectly reasonable to think an assestment might be less accurate due o feelings involved. I suggest you take no consideration for forum typings and instead either find your type yourself or contact some "professional" (There's no verifiable method nor school thus there's no way of measuring professionality in socionics, I'm meaning someone with years of reading, interpreting, developing and playing around with the theory) that has a version of socionics you trust and a methodology you consider to be the appropiate way of typing, specially when forum users can be very misguided or have too little example to give you proper assestment, and it can throw you into confusion to be typed as something that's very different or practically opposite to how you are, think, behave and have consistently done in the past, struggles, etc.