Gulenko's typings of forum members AKA Big G SquaD

[SlytherinPower]

Either way, I don't have Jack's typing listed for me, so I don't get the issue still. I also didn't say I agree with him.

[SlytherinPower]

Yes, keep the ethical arguments coming. Of course Ti hurts you and that's what you keep calling "Reframing". I didn't see any comments from you for days after I finally gave honest explanations of how I arrived at my self-typing as a response to you. That's before Vex now decided to kick me from the discord server, lol. You also had to block someone else who was giving you hard time about your lack of logic. That's definitely subjecting oneself to honesty, right?

I find it hilarious how you call Se leading as something glorious to be worn as a badge. Too bad you had to hand in the Beta badge, though. Btw, I would be fine with being some other type if that happened to fit better. But it is what it is.

You make really bold assessments which often turn out to be false, such as your typings including your self-typing. I admit I make bold assessments as well, the difference is that I can actually back them with logic instead of feeling though. You're the one who immediately retreats and shuts up when the debate becomes theory-heavy and you can't just turn it into a shouting match.

Let me get this right, you are typing me as Adam's identical or dual? And what are you typing him as? I really don't have anything against him (like you and Vex seem to have), but I don't think we are identicals or duals.

She just gets to calling people names, like telling 20 something yr olds they're "old" to try to hurt their feelings. She turns to bullying when she can't make an actual point.

Also, anyone Kiana doesn't like is a "delta".

[flames]

Somebody buy me a type for my birthday

[Hope]

If someone buys me a G type for christmas I'll stick to it.

[Computer Loser]

Hmm... A G type for Christmas. Should be on everyone's Santa wishlist

[Hope]

EIE

are you the G man? because if you are not you just owe me 120

[Hope]

No but I bought the typing for you
As for delta, IEE was short in supply and SLI and LSE nowhere to be found. Unless you prefer EII.

you are a sick person. And you owe me money.

[Vex]

You are all forgetting that it was /a process/ and Kiana changed her mind/started having some doubts and desired more confirmation and understanding after Jack typed LMFAO. From my side, I can attest that she was thinking about confirmation + DCNH subtype even before that (as she was talking about it). There is nothing wrong in that.

Kiana sees some patterns and sees relationships and that's why she argues, but not always assesses them at grander scale (understandable) or treats it with high consistency under a well-defined system. Those 're-typings' or 'you are not Se' are not random though - those are based on her observations and comparisons, on what she sees as working, she sees some differences in valuation; and Kiana certainly can think and analyse (well, to some degree at the very least, lol). And Se-lead is/was confirmed by various sources for her. She might be wrong in some of her assumptions, but I think she correctly distinguishes between 'not, not my type' and such. I'm not sure where she correctly sees Ti vs Te and always gets details right (North, just fucking get typed by Big G and cut it out) and maybe something is lost there, but yeah, we are all learning.

Thank you, I really like the way you reason.

[SlytherinPower]

I don't see how anyone can know someone well through 2 hours of talking anyway. Not to saying getting typed can't be helpful for people. Just going to say some people date people for years or live with family for years, & those people's sometimes barely really know them.

[SlytherinPower]

Yeah it's ridiculous to say anyone would get to know someone through 2 hours of talking, or 2 videos, etc. Socionics isn't meant to pick up on the actual personality, more the cognitive thinking of the mind, which is then placed in a type. That in itself doesn't need much video/time when asking the right questions, but this doesn't mean the person doing the typing will know everything about the person being typed.

Yes or that they really ask the right questions. I'm sure people could type me different depending on the questions they ask & what type of mindset I'm in. The best would prolly be to talk through video multiple times, talk extendedly through texts, & even better spend time with that person in person both one on one & with other people to see interactions. The longer you can observe them, the better too, especially since people can be depressed or have different things going on like that at different points.

If healthy, it's pretty easy to type some people quickly, though.

[Lolita]

Whatever makes you sleep better at night. It all just sounds like emotionally-fueled word vomit. Thanks for the entertainment. You are one unforgettable forum member... I will grant you that.

Sounds like you’re jealous and salty cuz I’m more memorable than you and I don’t care for that shit. You just want to gaslight others because you’re insecure. Oh let me play my invisible violin for your tears of being insignificant because you’re so delusional that you badly want to be a type that you’re not. Oh booo boo you had to con your type. You’re such a victim.

[Lolita]

Well that was fun... You guys are all funny. It's cool that gulenko helped people but people should not feel pressured to spend money to verify type.... That's high school level BS and sophomoric group think. That's why people are mocking you.

For people who willing choose to do so because of their own interest, good for them.

More cringe. You come here throwing doubt against people who got typed by G and blamed them because somehow that made you feel like you’re being pressured to get typed. NO WHERE in this thread has anyone that’s been typed by Gulenko including myself have EVER told others they should be typed. Now you flip the script and acting like you’re taking the moral high road with your sarcastic tone “oh good for them” bitch cop out. You’re such a damn coward. Your fake encouragement stinks even worse than your gaslighting.

[Lolita]

It's cool that I’m SB’s mouthpiece Hahahaha

Fixed it for you. Vex isn’t anyone’s mouthpiece unlike you who’s a lapdog for Sb.

Oh, why are you still here? This thread is for people who got typed by Gulenko. You can go make a thread that’s about people who are delusional and cling into their self-type because they wished they could be brave as those who did get typed by Gulenko.

[The Reality Denialist]

Where all my peripheral quadra boys and gals at?

Dude, we live in dumpsters. Comfy dumpsters... or cozy caves.

[Rusal]

Dude, we live in dumpsters.

Speak for yourself. Now that Gulenko is making it big I have plans to crash his place next summer. Vacations in the Black Sea woohoo!

Just to be on the safe side in the face of any misunderstanding, how do you say “we are a collective quadra, you twisted fuck” in Ukrainian?

[Northstar]

I understand the comparison but what I'm saying is that it's bunk. It doesn't make sense to expect someone who dabbles entirely in theory to build something. I was pretty much agreeing with the post peter made, which is interesting since someone who liked your post liked the post peter made

You mean this post?

The best basketball players don't necessarily make great basketball coaches, and the best basketball coaches weren't always the best basketball players. Different skills involved. Same can be applied to socionics

That is the same thing. Someone who is good at developing theory isn't necessarily good at applying said theory in practice and vice versa. Different skills involved. Do you understand now?

[Northstar]

So we’re talking about the same damn thing but you’re just reframing things over and over so you can win a dumb argument? Ok I guess we both agree in the end, people and their dumb fuck reframing.

You are the one who took issue with the simple comparison that you misunderstood. Glad you understand it now. "Reframing" is Ti and common for H-P cognitive style, you shouldn't hate on it that much. Unless your supposed dual isn't actually using H-P cog style and uses C-D instead?

[SGF]

i think one should try to understand perspectives in this debate

this might be an obvious observation but i notice it is people with weak Ti (not necessarily valued) who are more in need of clarification and an “objective” party to evaluate them.

whereas there are still Thinkers who use the service but it is more out of sense of curiosity... or to add as another lens into their repertoire? of their sense of self if that makes sense

perhaps it’s harder for feelers and especially Fe people to type themselves if that’s the case, and forum discussion where there are inevitably multiple conflicting viewpoints is harder for them to tune out... so an expert Socionist might be especially appealing to them in that sense. they aren’t stupid or lack independent thinking skills. a patient, reasonable, calm, and rational person with tact. something this forum is sorely missing.

almost definitely a Beta bias though. even monkeys fall from trees. not judging what ppl spend their money on, but it’s not unreasonable to doubt or point out systematic pitfalls.

Ti+Ne PolR = overthinking, doubt, analysis paralysis due to too many annoying variables and inability to arrive at a crystallized certainty due to imperfections as individuals cannot snugly fit the mold. Ti requires consistency. If anything is slightly off, that is a problem to be addressed and such problems need to constantly be addressed to reach clarity and certainty. I experience it as pedantic nitpicking at details and a need for perfection in consistency. I keep thinking about it and analyzing until all the details are ironed out.

A concrete real system is easy to understand, map and navigate. Something more ambiguous as the mind is not, its abstract. LSI thinking is too rigid for something like this and inconsistencies send it into a loop easily.

See LSI Ne PolR:

LSIs may have difficulty processing ambiguity or uncertainty. When they are the victim of necessary ambiguity, they may have a tendency to focus on the worst-case scenario, and may attempt to expend so much effort as to be prepared for any conceivable contingency. Some LSIs may also tend to be very suspicious of others' intentions. Many LSIs have a tendency to see most issues in black and white terms, seeing others as clearly right or wrong, and they may have difficulty adapting to ideas espousing shades of gray, multiplicity of causes, or doubt, often seeing such perspectives as logically weak, unstructured, or inconsistent. Indeed, they may see little value in such ambiguous perspectives and may see them as not useful at all -- rather, strong and unarguably consistent points may seem more compelling and important to them. Only through a gradual and tireless process of experiential learning can LSIs grow to understand and alter the nature of their perspectives and categories (many older LSIs are more "mellow" than "rough").

LSIs' logical programs may necessitate that they feel a certain degree of control over others and their surroundings. LSIs that feel that they have none of their necessary control in a situation may react irritably, argumentatively, and sometimes lose control of their emotions in the form of a seemingly childish tantrum. They may have difficulty dealing with people who are consistently spastic and unreliable in their behavior, or who are always doing or seeking something new -- such individuals are too unpredictable and lawless, and offend their ability to oversee others around them.

LSIs may sometimes be seen as paranoid, overly defensive and quite territorial in dealing with others.

LSI are sterotypical enneagram 6-es.

[Vex]

You are the one who took issue with the simple comparison that you misunderstood. Glad you understand it now. "Reframing" is Ti and common for H-P cognitive style, you shouldn't hate on it that much. Unless your supposed dual isn't actually using H-P cog style and uses C-D instead?

After explaining things from my point of view and you coming in and correcting things endlessly, I tried to patch it up multiple times IMO (which you probably didn't even notice because monkey logic). Yeah, someone can be good at a theory but not build skyscrapers, because that takes another specialist. I'm very glad we reached that conclusion.

I'm confirmed IEI pretty much, but you can believe you and I are whatever for all I care.

[Tzuyu]

Frankly I genuinely think that self typing should be 90% your own journey and 10% the opinion of others. Fuck people who battle-type others. I am pretty young (personality still malleable) and not that mentally healthy, so it’s been mildly difficult with plenty of mis-steps but I feel confident with the end result, despite not really fitting a perfect stereotype. If I listened to the opinions of others this would never happen. Also I don’t really dislike the DCNH theory itself but the way it’s been applied to “stretch” a type has put me off it completely. Some forum practitioners who will not be named also reek of confirmation bias. Big G’s analysis and effort seem well-intended and thought out but the sheer length of time spent is just too short and impacts accuracy heavily. He is familiar in English but there is still a slight language barrier. His impressive expertise applies to theory only, “knowing” a person is another thing.

I would feel differently if these people did a lengthy contact process, even a week long, interview process like Filatova did with her wonderful portraits. But of course, the money would then only be affordable and willingly billed by rich eccentric quacks. So this is what we have. But I think a much better alternative would instead have a Ti ego write a lengthy guide on how to logically assess yourself and what areas should be payed attention to or ignored, basically a compilation of the most useful information off this site, for people who struggle in that area. Big G squad is funny as a meme but is encouraging it as a thousand times better than forum typing is kind of...meh. It is better, but still not great. This is the summary of observations.

[Chthonic Daydream]

Big G squad is funny as a meme but is encouraging it as a thousand times better than forum typing is kind of...meh. It is better, but still not great. This is the summary of observations.

I was honestly hoping that's what it was from the very beginning. Reyne literally made a big D pun in the title.

[Aster]

Speak for yourself. Now that Gulenko is making it big I have plans to crash his place next summer. Vacations in the Black Sea woohoo!

Just to be on the safe side in the face of any misunderstanding, how do you say “we are a collective quadra, you twisted fuck” in Ukrainian?

Yeah, I’ve been thinking, gulenko should be having a nice Christmas this year.

[Aster]

I stress so much that I get different feedback and not confident at all with what my personal understanding is ��

I’ve been there, too...changed a bit lately. Gotten a little bit more mentally healthy. At this point I’m starting to feel like sticking to my guns more.

[Lolita]

Frankly I genuinely think that self typing should be 90% your own journey and 10% the opinion of others. Fuck people who battle-type others. I am pretty young (personality still malleable) and not that mentally healthy, so it’s been mildly difficult with plenty of mis-steps but I feel confident with the end result, despite not really fitting a perfect stereotype. If I listened to the opinions of others this would never happen. Also I don’t really dislike the DCNH theory itself but the way it’s been applied to “stretch” a type has put me off it completely. Some forum practitioners who will not be named also reek of confirmation bias. Big G’s analysis and effort seem well-intended and thought out but the sheer length of time spent is just too short and impacts accuracy heavily. He is familiar in English but there is still a slight language barrier. His impressive expertise applies to theory only, “knowing” a person is another thing.

Self-typing does indeed start with individual interest to explore, however it doesn’t stay that way because it’s near impossible to remove yourself from the typing process and then give an unbiased assessment applying the theory to yourself. It’s really hard to look at yourself objectively and that's why people have the tendency to self-type as something they want to be, something flattering.

Cognitive type isn’t about “knowing” someone at all. It’s not about “personality” or behavior. It doesn’t measure intelligence or mental health or emotional health, either. It’s about determining the map of your thinking style and tracing the origins of how you think and motivations. For G who has 30+ years experience and he knows how to recognize the subtle nuances that laypersons don’t know about. That’s why he’s a professional and we’re hobbyists.

I would feel differently if these people did a lengthy contact process, even a week long, interview process like Filatova did with her wonderful portraits. But of course, the money would then only be affordable and willingly billed by rich eccentric quacks. So this is what we have. But I think a much better alternative would instead have a Ti ego write a lengthy guide on how to logically assess yourself and what areas should be payed attention to or ignored, basically a compilation of the most useful information off this site, for people who struggle in that area. Big G squad is funny as a meme but is encouraging it as a thousand times better than forum typing is kind of...meh. It is better, but still not great. This is the summary of observations.

But that’s an arbitrary amount of time from your POV. You don’t have the equal amount of experience G has in order to determine what’s sufficient time in order to determine cognitive type so how can you say that if he studied people for a weeks at a time that he’s more accurate than people submitting in their videos for an hour or under? He’s had 30 years experience and maybe he did actually start off that way. The point is, who the hell would anyone want a psychologist to follow them around for a week?! Which again, this isn’t about knowing someone on any deeper level like you’re gonna marry them or be their friend. This isn’t a personal thing. Cognitive mapping is actually more general than that.

Reyne just created this thread to get info. G squad is fitting.

[Lolita]

it's just that once N-subs have learned a theory, they are unlikely to be convinced by something else. it's because they have accentuated Ti, which makes them stick to rules they have previously learned. for the C-subs, N-subs are overly pedantic and close-minded. C-Subs are much more open-minded and jump from idea to idea, but unlike the N-sub, they rarely study things in-depth and quickly move on to something else, unless something really captures their interest. N-subs choose very few areas of interests, but they try to get a thorough understand of something. N-subs, especially when they are rational types, can do something like this for example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n33fA8dO9GI

they can focus on a lot of details too that escape the C-subs attention. this C/N dynamic is for example the reason why gulenko doesn't work with jack from WSS, because jack is a normalising subtype who only focuses on classical socionics. gulenko told me that his school rarely attracks N subtypes unless they have grown up in a creative subtype family.

I also suspect the reason that many here get typed as IEI or LSI by gulenko is that beta is probably the most likely quadra to seek out an external authority for help. I also assume that the majority of people who study socionics are introverts.

This is really cool! Is there a reason as to why Normalizing subtypes often come from Creative subtype families? Gulenko typed me as SEE-N and I’m pretty sure my parents are Delta STs but I don’t know what their subtypes could be.

[kingslayer]

Gulenko typed me correctly imo.. in contrast to the forum which is filled with bumbling idiots who mislead ppl. I equate it to a kind of infuriating gas-lighting of ppl trying to understand themselves and I will fight you fuckers down to the bone if I have to.

I agree with this sentiment, I just don't think it's deliberate gas lighting in most cases(doesn't take away from the fact it's gas lighting). Though I suppose there are some sad sad bastards preying on forums like this too. Probably not as common as people just being imposing with the way they understand the system to help them justify their self typings and the realty they have constructed themselves according to such..

[Socionics Is Not A Cult]

It would be beneficial for the armchair psychologists to go forth and discover themselves.

[The Reality Denialist]

If a person is D then they probably drive in the agenda.

[Tzuyu]

I was honestly hoping that's what it was from the very beginning. Reyne literally made a big D pun in the title.

I believe the memes alone are worth the venture of any undertaking.

Also a wider discussion of the low quality nature of forum typing in the "What's My Type?" threads, as well as how common it is for other people to, unsolicited, "type" members without being asked to in the first place. I find it extremely rude as well as causing the other person to dig into their heels more most of the time.

Pertaining to the low quality, I just don't understand why some people will just put a type without any analysis or thorough explanation whatsoever. "You are sooooooo ESE" or "mb F type".

"You remind me of person X, who is EII" is something I'm also guilty of, but should also be avoided if that's the only comment there is. It's a valid strategy for personal use but for the person on the other end can't differentiate your validity between a quack or a genius. Going into grounded detail on what specific parts remind you of person X is also a good mental exercise for developing your typing skills.

Not that there should be an actual rule enforced or anything, but I wish people would be better at explaining themselves when typing others, put more effort into it, better for the community and all. And people shouldn't be shamed when they decide to change types, affecting how they write and view themselves. It's a part of the natural process. Maybe then people would be less inclined to spend money on typing services. That's all.

[Number 9 large]

Ti+Ne PolR = overthinking, doubt, analysis paralysis due to too many annoying variables and inability to arrive at a crystallized certainty due to imperfections as individuals cannot snugly fit the mold. Ti requires consistency. If anything is slightly off, that is a problem to be addressed and such problems need to constantly be addressed to reach clarity and certainty. I experience it as pedantic nitpicking at details and a need for perfection in consistency. I keep thinking about it and analyzing until all the details are ironed out.

A concrete real system is easy to understand, map and navigate. Something more ambiguous as the mind is not, its abstract. LSI thinking is too rigid for something like this and inconsistencies send it into a loop easily.

See LSI Ne PolR:

LSIs may have difficulty processing ambiguity or uncertainty. When they are the victim of necessary ambiguity, they may have a tendency to focus on the worst-case scenario, and may attempt to expend so much effort as to be prepared for any conceivable contingency. Some LSIs may also tend to be very suspicious of others' intentions. Many LSIs have a tendency to see most issues in black and white terms, seeing others as clearly right or wrong, and they may have difficulty adapting to ideas espousing shades of gray, multiplicity of causes, or doubt, often seeing such perspectives as logically weak, unstructured, or inconsistent. Indeed, they may see little value in such ambiguous perspectives and may see them as not useful at all -- rather, strong and unarguably consistent points may seem more compelling and important to them. Only through a gradual and tireless process of experiential learning can LSIs grow to understand and alter the nature of their perspectives and categories (many older LSIs are more "mellow" than "rough").

LSIs' logical programs may necessitate that they feel a certain degree of control over others and their surroundings. LSIs that feel that they have none of their necessary control in a situation may react irritably, argumentatively, and sometimes lose control of their emotions in the form of a seemingly childish tantrum. They may have difficulty dealing with people who are consistently spastic and unreliable in their behavior, or who are always doing or seeking something new -- such individuals are too unpredictable and lawless, and offend their ability to oversee others around them.

LSIs may sometimes be seen as paranoid, overly defensive and quite territorial in dealing with others.

LSI are sterotypical enneagram 6-es.

:clap: somebody else figured it out too

[Lolita]

Gulenko typed me correctly imo.. in contrast to the forum which is filled with bumbling idiots who mislead ppl. I equate it to a kind of infuriating gas-lighting of ppl trying to understand themselves and I will fight you fuckers down to the bone if I have to.

YASSSSS I support this!!! This is what happens when Ti gets violated!!




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SGF]

:clap: somebody else figured it out too

There was someone else?

[Socionics Is Not A Cult]

No one is winning in this corner of the internet.

[Adam Strange]

There was someone else?

[Not A Communist Shill]

To those who have been typed by Gulenko:
1) How confident are you that he is correct?
2) How would you disprove his typing?

[The Reality Denialist]

Yes, Ne PoLR sounds very 6. Anyway, depending on the wording someone who is not familiar of enneagram context might assign 6 to Ni base.

So, T + static roughly a head/gut type; F+dynamic roughly a heart/gut type. Enneagram is probably very fractured so one could take a pick. Some experts calls 7 schizotypal others would not even consider it. Oldham > enneagram but it is much harder to truly understand it as you can not due to its rigidness have highly various schools of thought. Once you discover your own Oldham type by yourself (if assisted it is a different story) it can truly bamboozle you because it calls for some sort of preliminary ego death.

[justalitnerdxx]

To those who have been typed by Gulenko:
1) How confident are you that he is correct?
2) How would you disprove his typing?

I was typed IEI-H. I do trust that in his eyes it’s correct. I personally just am a little torn cause I can see more of a case for EII and myself being a Si/Ne and Fi/Te valuer. If anything I am to the belief that I’m more likely to be SEI than IEI.

That said, I am aware I have much to learn and my understanding may be faulty. There is a lot of stereotypes about what types and Quadras are like. And to me, Beta and Se is the antithesis of who I am. However I do relate to the profile I was given and the reasoning did make sense. It’s when I dig deeper I’m like “nope. Can’t be IEI”.

I’m not sure how I would disprove the typing aside from saying that myself and others who know me don’t see me as a Se valuer at all. When I’ve mentioned IEI previously as a potential typing I’ve been gently encouraged that it wouldn’t be the right type. That said, its my opinion but I likewise can’t really prove the typing wrong. Not sure I can prove it correct either. It’s Gulenko’s findings and opinion at the end of the day ��*♀️

[on a peaceful hiatus]

This is really cool! Is there a reason as to why Normalizing subtypes often come from Creative subtype families? Gulenko typed me as SEE-N and I’m pretty sure my parents are Delta STs but I don’t know what their subtypes could be.

I think it's more common the other way around, normalising parents having a creative subtype child. it's the typical situation of "my parents don't understand me". I would recommend N-sub parents with a C-sub child to figure out their specific interests and try to support them as much as they can in that area.

[on a peaceful hiatus]

What would you say about D-subtypes?

I have a couple of D-sub friends. all of them are very tall and have a lot of energy. some of them do sports 6 times a week. love challenges, very demanding but also supportive once you get into their inner circle. hate details, they need someone that explains them the rules of something. not inclined to self-reflection or questioning their decisions. it's easy to explain socionics to them, but they rarely spend a lot of time reading about it. often have a specific goal that they work towards (most often job-related). care a lot about data and especially efficiency. constantly criticize inefficiency in their envoriment. (accentuated Te). pay attention to people's appearance, easily get into fights and arguments with others. can easily lose their temper. expresses his opinion openly without caring what is acceptable. D and C subs seem to be good friends, the same applies to N and H subs. I assume it's because the energy level is similar. (D and C prefer excitment in their life, while N and H prefer a more quiet and predictable routine.)

oh btw, if the subtype of a person matches the base type, they will be easier to type overall. for example, dominant subtypes are based on EJ temperaments, so a dominant LSE will be extremly easy to type, you will notice it immediatly. a dominant EII on the other hand might not be easy to type. creative subs are based on EP temperaments, so a creative Ne-dom will be very easy to type and behave a bit like Doc Brown for example. a normalising LII will also be very easy to type and so on.

[Lolita]

I think it's more common the other way around, normalising parents having a creative subtype child. it's the typical situation of "my parents don't understand me". I would recommend N-sub parents with a C-sub child to figure out their specific interests and try to support them as much as they can in that area.

But why does Gulenko say there’s not a lot of normalizing types that get typed? It seems to me there’s a lot of weirdo creative types.