Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 77

Thread: How do YOU type people?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default How do YOU type people?

    As for me, I look at whichever factors appear to be relevant (meaning something stands out and appears to be type related), including the overall concept being expressed in type descriptions, dichotomy descriptions, duality descriptions, function descriptions, and quadra descriptions. However, it's important to consider that different types do the same exact things for different reasons. For this reason, the primary characteristics/concepts which I use to type people are quadra values and temperaments.

    To better explain how I view types and quadra values, I'll quote something I said in another thread:

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    My "model" consists of 8 "types", the rational and irrational dual pairs from each quadra. I pretty much use Model A, except that there really aren't any unconscious functions because between the two types in the dual pair, all of the functions are conscious. If, for example, I'm thinking of Si in Alpha rationals, I'm thinking of how the ESFj fulfills the INTj's hidden agenda. If I'm thinking of Fi in Gamma rationals, I'm thinking of how the ISFj fulfills the ENTj's dual seeking function. With functions that aren't quadra values, however, I think of the corresponding function that is a quadra value, which would be the 3rd & 5th or 4th & 6th. For example, if I'm thinking of Si in Gamma rationals, I'm thinking of how the ISFj's Se covers the ENTj's Si PoLR.

    So... I guess I don't see functions as being static within Model A, I instead see the interactions of functions between dual pairs.
    Any reference I make to type descriptions, dichotomy descriptions, duality descriptions, function descriptions, and quadra descriptions solely for the purposes of using that medium to communicate an overall concept, and I only intend for people to reference the overall concept of those descriptions in regards to what I am saying. (If one attempts to apply specific examples of type behavior, it is very easy to take what's written in descriptions out of context.)

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i look almost exclusively at temperament, behavior as it relates to functional tendencies, clear manifestations of functions, overall life outlook (probably less useful than the others, but i'm prejudiced toward its influence all the same) and whether or not the subject fits my conception of a particular type.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    994
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I ask them. Usually looking at each individual section one by one. Such as Introvert/Extrovert, then Sensing/Intuition.
    INTP/ILI(Ni) /5w4

    "When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
    Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    I ask them. Usually looking at each individual section one by one. Such as Introvert/Extrovert, then Sensing/Intuition.
    that's an extremely poor way to go about anything type-related.

  5. #5
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,418
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1) By comparison meaning someones behaviour matches exactly with someone who's type you already know
    (this only works when you have a big database of typed people in your head). FAST
    2) Look at the whole picture. Sometimes a person is just a clear stereotype. FAST
    3) Visual Identification (mostly as a first glance, or sometimes as backup). FAST
    4) Figuring out the 4 dichotomys or keirsey's 4 temperaments. SLOW

    In my beginning days i only used nr 4.
    Nowadays nr 1, 2 and 3 are sufficient in most cases.

  6. #6

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    994
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    I ask them. Usually looking at each individual section one by one. Such as Introvert/Extrovert, then Sensing/Intuition.
    that's an extremely poor way to go about anything type-related.
    Reasoning?
    INTP/ILI(Ni) /5w4

    "When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
    Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

  7. #7
    Enlightened Hedonist
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    18,373
    Mentioned
    447 Post(s)
    Tagged
    4 Thread(s)

    Default

    I look at the emotions of people and see in what way they manifest themselves in a particular person - e.g. the way + reason they are being happy or sad, and how they deal with problems - e.g. do they moan to the nearest person, asl questions, speak out loud etc. I also think about what quadras\temperments\clubs they belong to, depending on the data available - I usually type someone as IxFp for example, then think about which quadra they might belong to. Sometimes, to type someone as IxFp is enough, as I have a general idea of what that person is like.

  8. #8
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    I ask them. Usually looking at each individual section one by one. Such as Introvert/Extrovert, then Sensing/Intuition.
    that's an extremely poor way to go about anything type-related.
    Reasoning?
    E/I, S/N, T/F, P/J is in itself a HORRIBLE way to think of or determine types. Asking people will only provide you with confused answers.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    I ask them. Usually looking at each individual section one by one. Such as Introvert/Extrovert, then Sensing/Intuition.
    that's an extremely poor way to go about anything type-related.
    Reasoning?
    E/I, S/N, T/F, P/J is in itself a HORRIBLE way to think of or determine types. Asking people will only provide you with confused answers.
    what she said.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    994
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't ask them directly, I'll ask questions to determine which they have preference for. I believe they have a very similar system on Socionics.com
    INTP/ILI(Ni) /5w4

    "When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
    Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

  11. #11

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    I don't ask them directly, I'll ask questions to determine which they have preference for. I believe they have a very similar system on Socionics.com
    even worse

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    994
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'll take your opinions under advisement but I'm afraid that I don't agree.
    INTP/ILI(Ni) /5w4

    "When my time comes, forget the wrong that I've done.
    Help me leave behind some reasons to be missed."

  13. #13

  14. #14
    BLauritson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bristol, England
    Posts
    979
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Back when I was into the whole MBTI thing, I typed people using the whole "E or I? T or F? etc." system. Now that I am something greater , and know the types of various acquaintances, I tend to use a mixture of VI by association and simply narrowing the type down in my head, based on my knowledge of the types and how that person corresponds to them. Oh, intertype relations. That's the other one I use to type people.
    ILI (Indescribable Lovemaking Inc.)
    5w4 so/sx

    "IP temperament! Because today's concerns are tomorrow's indifferences!"

    Lord Fnorgle's Domain - A slowly growing collection of music, poetry and literature.
    Stickam music performances

  15. #15
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    4) Figuring out the 4 dichotomys or keirsey's 4 temperaments. SLOW
    You can't assess a socionic type by assessing Keirsey's Temperaments, because they are not based on the same things than socionics.

    For example, let's compare socionics and keirsevian T/F :

    Socionics T/F = logical/ethical
    Keirsey T/F = tough-minded/friendly

    And I have a number of cases of tough-minded ethical types...

    If you're using Keirsey's temperaments to assess socionic types, you're taking the risk to generate bogus typings and a bogus database, unless you are using your own (proprietary) socionic model, which would be compatible to Keirsey's temperaments. A few professional socionics actually do...

    Keirsey's temperaments are not symmetrical, so they are not logical.

  16. #16
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,418
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KSpin
    I'll take your opinions under advisement but I'm afraid that I don't agree.
    As in my first post in this topic, I would say it's a good choice of typing people using the four dichotomy's when you don't have a big database of already typed people in your head.

    But the more experienced you get the more you would probably start to rely on the quicker methods.

  17. #17
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    - VI - Physical similarities to people I have typed (it's not really "Hey, x looks like y, they must be the same type;" it's based on movements, vocal intonations, expressions, and (in specific cases) facial resemblence.

    - As Joy said, the "feel" of the type descriptions is very important. You have to realize that Socionics types signify a very distinct "kind" of person, and once you pick up a feel for type descriptions and can get at what they are essentially trying to convey, you can usually get at least one "point," as I call it, towards a type for any individual just by picking up their vibe.

    - Functional breakdown of a person's behavior. Learning to recognize informational elements in peoples' speech and what they are apparently able to give to others and are open to receiving can allow you to type someone in a pretty short amount of time. This takes a complete understanding of the functions, how they manifest when blocked with another function, and how they operate in specific types and their respective blocks.

    - Quadra "feel," like type, can lead to a easy "point" for one type over another when interacting with people. Notice how they interact with other people you've already typed for sure, and what they seem to like or dislike about the people around them.

    - Intertype relations are important, but should probably be considered last of all these. It's really easy to type people by saying "Oh, they are best friends, they must be at least in the same quadra," or "they're married, so I'll see if duality works for them" (and, if you take this approach, it almost assuredly WILL work; unfortunately, selective thinking is apparently rampant in Socionics typing).

  18. #18
    Exits, pursued by a bear. Animal's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    TIM
    It sneaks up on you
    Posts
    3,062
    Mentioned
    86 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I do everything Gilly lists above, but mostly I just use myself as a litmus test - how smooth/strained are our interactions, and in what ways? It's flawed, but it's worked for me.
    "How could we forget those ancient myths that stand at the beginning of all races, the myths about dragons that at the last moment are transformed into princesses? Perhaps all the dragons in our lives are princesses who are only waiting to see us act, just once, with beauty and courage. Perhaps everything that frightens us is, in its deepest essence, something helpless that wants our love."
    -- Rainer Maria Rilke, Letters to a Young Poet

  19. #19
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I don't use VI, because VI doesn't work. VI has 70% correlation rate for each trait, which is insufficient for serious typing.

    I use mainly observation for typing : dichotomies (Jung and Reinin), relative typing (calculating type with intertype relationships), direct element typing and direct full-type typing (taking types as "separate", like in enneagram).

  20. #20
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [quote="machintruc"]I don't use VI, because VI doesn't work. VI has 70% correlation rate for each trait, which is insufficient for serious typing.[quote]

    What the fuck are you talking about? What traits? Where the hell did you get these statistics? You are completely full of shit in my book as of this moment.

  21. #21
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GillySaysGoodbye
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    I don't use VI, because VI doesn't work. VI has 70% correlation rate for each trait, which is insufficient for serious typing.
    What the fuck are you talking about? What traits? Where the hell did you get these statistics? You are completely full of shit in my book as of this moment.
    he's obviously only 70% full of shit

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [quote="GillySaysGoodbye"][quote="machintruc"]I don't use VI, because VI doesn't work. VI has 70% correlation rate for each trait, which is insufficient for serious typing.

    What the fuck are you talking about? What traits? Where the hell did you get these statistics? You are completely full of shit in my book as of this moment.
    lol i buy that he has no basis for these statistics but you can't seriously suggest that VI is even close to as accurate as claimed here.

  23. #23

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    44
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Typing people can be very tricky. Some are kind of easy as they seem to fit a certain vision I have about some types. But firstly, I try to find the quadra the person is most likely to belong to. Also, some people give off similar vibes. So, if I am sure of someone's type and encounter another person who gives off a similar vibe, it helps me zero in on that person's functions. I can also try to type people based on their dealings with others, how they interact with each other or with people that I've already typed. Peers that I've known for years serve as my models. It's harder when meeting people from types I'm not used to. The person who was the hardest for me to type has been myself.

  24. #24
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by niffweed17
    Quote Originally Posted by GillySaysGoodbye
    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    I don't use VI, because VI doesn't work. VI has 70% correlation rate for each trait, which is insufficient for serious typing.
    What the fuck are you talking about? What traits? Where the hell did you get these statistics? You are completely full of shit in my book as of this moment.
    lol i buy that he has no basis for these statistics but you can't seriously suggest that VI is even close to as accurate as claimed here.
    The accuracy of VI is entirely dependant on experience. If you know what ACTUALLY matters, and have a large enough VI "library" of people that are accurately typed to compare to, then it's definitely possible to get fairly reliable results even with VI alone (in some cases). Most people here (including, obviously, our little buddy) can claim neither of those things to any extent that their VI skills would be anywhere close to reliable.

    I, on the other hand, am the fucking shit, and can determine any person's type by looking at half of his face from approximately 6.8 miles away. Bow, my minions. Bow.

  25. #25
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,814
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Functional preference, quadra values, temperment . . . it depends on the person and what stands out but those are probably the three things I notice most.

    I'm not particularly into VI, but I think you can tell something by a person's natural expressions, how a person chooses to present himself/herself, that kind of thing.
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  26. #26
    machintruc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,252
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Lytov said that professional socionists don't use VI because it's inaccurate. Augusta reported physiological correlations, mainly for temperaments. Ganin then created VI to popularise HIS version of socionics, which resembles more Myers-Briggs (i.e. with lonely introverts and unfriendly thinkers).

  27. #27
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,418
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


    The accuracy of VI is entirely dependant on experience. If you know what ACTUALLY matters, and have a large enough VI "library" of people that are accurately typed to compare to, then it's definitely possible to get fairly reliable results even with VI alone (in some cases).
    I agree. Exactly how I think.

    VI really works to a certain point, I've experimented enough with it to know this for sure.

  28. #28
    Expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    10,853
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by machintruc
    Lytov said that professional socionists don't use VI because it's inaccurate. Augusta reported physiological correlations, mainly for temperaments. Ganin then created VI to popularise HIS version of socionics, which resembles more Myers-Briggs (i.e. with lonely introverts and unfriendly thinkers).
    Lytov seems not to give any value to VI at all. According to Rick, most Socionists in Russia/Ukraine (like DarkAngelFireWolf69, Meged, etc) seem to use it "informally" ie they will guess a person's type from pictures informally but not include that in their "official" typings.

    My own approach is similar to what Joy, Gilly and Slacker Mom said. It depends on what is most visible in each case.
    , LIE, ENTj logical subtype, 8w9 sx/sp
    Quote Originally Posted by implied
    gah you're like the shittiest ENTj ever!

  29. #29
    snegledmaca's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    1,900
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I type people solely on my impression, assement of them. Initially my assessment sucks, but over time, as I get to know the person better, my impression of them gets better and better. I interpret my impressions with pieces of knowledge that I poses and get their type.

  30. #30
    Rocket's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    120
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    After you have a sufficient database you can normally type people at a glance due to the similarity with a known individual. It could be something as simple as the way a laugh was delivered or a particular phrase or look.

    Much of the time now i can guess a persons type by the nature of their response to my words or even to my presence. For example the way a particular emotion/feeling is delivered. For instance .... If i get a "warm" feeling from another and it appears unencumberred by expectation its almost certainly ISFP. If i get warmth but with an undercurrent of "wait and see" then its INFP. If i get a warm feeling delivered in an "excitable" fashion then its ESFJ. Warmth delivered in a "formal/serious" manner will come from ESTJ whereas warmth from an ISTP will come in a "thoughtful/reserved" evenhanded manner. If someone appears particularly inaccessible or hard to connect with (or type) then its probably an ISTJ who has been made unconfortable by observing my behaviours.

    Dichotomies are also useful and accurate. I still use them occassionally .. mostly for confirmation. S/N is quite easy. Just look at their eyes if the tend to continually land/focus on objects they are probably Sensing. If they tend to drift/ lose focus then Intuitive is a good bet. T/F is another easy one, it should not be hard to establish the range/repetoire of emotions on display. If someone lacks a sizeable repetoire of emotional displays then they are probably a thinking type.
    ILE

  31. #31
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno

    The accuracy of VI is entirely dependant on experience. If you know what ACTUALLY matters, and have a large enough VI "library" of people that are accurately typed to compare to, then it's definitely possible to get fairly reliable results even with VI alone (in some cases).
    I agree. Exactly how I think.

    VI really works to a certain point, I've experimented enough with it to know this for sure.
    How do you know you've typed the people in your VI "library" correctly?

  32. #32
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,814
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Is this the same person who said he knows MBTI and Socionics types are the same because of 25 people he figures he's accurately typed?
    It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.
    -Mark Twain


    You can't wake a person who is pretending to be asleep.

  33. #33
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    How do we know we've typed ANYONE correctly? How could we use comparisons for behavioral traits? How do we even know that we know what functions look like IRL? Totally useless questions, Joy.

    For all intents and purposes, we have to suppose that an experienced VIer, at least one who is going to be using a "library" as a basis for typing, is going to know how to type people well enough to both use others whose types they are fairly sure of along with a reasonable dose of skepticism and room for flexibility in order to type people accurately.

    It's entirely subjective. But it works. Get over it.

  34. #34
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,418
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno

    The accuracy of VI is entirely dependant on experience. If you know what ACTUALLY matters, and have a large enough VI "library" of people that are accurately typed to compare to, then it's definitely possible to get fairly reliable results even with VI alone (in some cases).
    I agree. Exactly how I think.

    VI really works to a certain point, I've experimented enough with it to know this for sure.
    How do you know you've typed the people in your VI "library" correctly?
    because i backed it up with other ways of typing. They all are the same, that's when i got started to see similarity's between peoples faces.

  35. #35
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE
    Posts
    24,507
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GillySaysGoodbye
    Ti > Te
    my point exactly

  36. #36
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,615
    Mentioned
    235 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I compare their external traits such as, the way they move, the way they interact, the speech patterns, the body language, and fit them in one of the types. Some types could actually be wrong in the sense, it might be that all the people I have typed as "esfj" are actually "enfj", but the sets are consistent in themselves.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    32
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think I'm one who has a "library" of sorts, or really I've read up enough about the types and they are all characters to me, and I pick up on vibes for who fits what type best. If I can't do that, I do go through the whole "are they E/I, S/N" ect as usually I can figure out 3/4 letters out of the type and have to figure out the last one. I'm not a big fan of VI, but there are so body language and other physical traits that do give hints at types that I factor in if they are noticable enough. If all fails, and I'm really determined to find out their type, I go through a trail and error of applying a type to them and see how much they are or are not like it, then keep assigning different preferences until they all stick. Most of this happens rather quickly in my mind, I don't know if it's because I'm extremely familiar with all of this or it's my particular functions, but I can usually tell a person's type rather quickly without really consciously snooping for traits.
    ENFp

  38. #38
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joy
    I call everything a matter of functional preference when I'm wrong and Gilly is obviously kicking my ass with his

  39. #39

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    8,577
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GillySaysGoodbye
    chickens taste good

  40. #40
    Let's fly now Gilly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    3w4 sx/so
    Posts
    24,685
    Mentioned
    95 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I actually laughed at that, Niffweed; you've come a long way since shaking off your "Phaedrus Disciple" status

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •