It seems that my type has become an issue again, possibly, due to Expat's arguments that I'm IEI. I'll put a thread here to try to consolidate such discussions rather than having them turn up in other threads, as that has been discussed as a problem when it's happened with other people.
Here's what I understrand to be the views of several people on the forum about my probable type:
Rick: ILI (based on VI and analysis of my comments as using Te)
A number of others: ILI (usually from people who note an "identity" relation, and not just Phaedrus )
The poll results in the previous thread about my type: LII (some later on changed and said I'm ILI)
Smilex: IEI (or Ni subtype of some sort) (based on his belief that he's LSE and that he senses Ni but not supervisory relations)
Expat: IEI (seems to be based mostly on his view that my "T" arguments on whatever point aren't convincing to him?)
Tcaud: LIE-IEE dual type (because I remind him of his professor and Tony Blair)
MBTI: Came out ENFP (just barely F, just barely E)
Quadra-based, Hugo-style tests: LII
Rcmew's "long" test awhile back: IEE with high Ne, but with Fe>Fi
Socionics "type assistant" and similar tools that emphasize the letter dichotomies: ILI
I'm not going to do a poll again this time because obviously what the majority of people think (or even what various "authorities" think) really isn't a good way to determine type. I'm more interested in focusing the discussion (if people are willing) on some of the interesting views that have been put forth.
First of all, Expat's theory intrigues me. (You can read his views in a number of recent "General Discussion" posts.) If he's right, we'd have to answer (regarding myself):
Why Ni > Ne? (One might think Ni by default, given that the two main types in contention are ILI and IEI, but if one thinks Ti>Te, then Ni vs. Ne becomes more of an issue.)
Why Fe > Fi?
Why Ti > Te?
Why F > T?
Secondly, Tcaud's theory is pretty far from everyone else's, so if someone could explain it or comment, I'd be interested in that too.