In contrast, for me: I experience it as watching people run their psychological dysfunctions and related type-related tantrums all over the place under the guise of "discussion" and that isn't interesting to me. For me, that is not a peer-based intelligent respectful dialogue between grown (regardless of age in years) people seeking deeper exploration and understanding and actual learning across complex combinations of similarities and differences. Instead to me it seems more like some weird cyclically ongoing group therapy session in which people continually throw poop at each other to work through their dysfunctions/issues. Maybe some people need or want that kind of thing. Maybe others find it interesting to witness. Me, not so much. (also complete tangent here: @prplchknz, tagging you in case you would find this poop-throwing metaphor amusing and/or accurate).People often don't know why they react the way they do to others. The beauty of the interaction on a forum like this is you get to see how people are different than you and if they publish their type you begin to discern patterns. I can think of one person here who tends to bash 6s. It doesn't bother me at all. I enjoy seeing him deal through his frustrations and don't take criticisms of my type seriously enough to be offended by it. It's just a lens.
Note: And I'm recently seeing quite clearly that it's actually not about whether the focus is on psychological issues and dysfunction itself. I've recently been exploring some non-type-related damage from my own early experiences, and part of the exploration is online in discussion forum contexts. I see from that experience that it is possible for people to thoughtfully explore very difficult, deep-seated, sometimes pretty gothic, and even explosive personal issues and pain without turning the discussions into some sort of faux re-enactment of the worst of their issues in the actual participation/discussion process.
That said, as I've been thinking about this particular discussion thread, I've been wondering if typologycentral relies on what I name as dysfunctional dynamic to provide a sort of heat and energy and interest that it wouldn't otherwise generate or attract.
And/or - maybe this site really is meant to provide a space where participants who as so inclined can just let their psychological damage drive how they participate and communicate with others, as a way to deal with things somehow. That is, maybe it really is meant to be that sort of "go ahead, run that dysfunction without restraint, just go for it" kind of space, a context deliberately created for at least some people to enact and re-enact their psychological dysfunctions by engaging in them in interaction with others, while others watch it all unfold. Maybe you as the owner see real value in providing a space for that kind of dynamic and despite what I think of it all, maybe for some people there is real psychological (therapeutic) value in that approach. And while I myself may be appalled by such interactions and don't see that as a particularly valuable approach given my own focus areas in engaging the type concepts and language, I can see that such a space could be considered valuable outside of whatever makes sense to me. Seriously. If that really is the case, maybe there's a way to make that more explicit for potential new participants somehow, eg in the site documentation/FAQs/etc as things unfold (or maybe it's in there and I just didn't see it, quite possible).
Hmmm, I'm not sure about this one way or another (whether it is about INFJ and INTJ cognitive function differences). I do feel like in my experience, there are some relatively nuanced ways to use the conceptual tools of typology. When it comes specifically to attending to nuances, this comment is a recent example of how I myself find it useful to approach type and use the concepts in what I consider to be a nuanced way (in this case for practical real life based self-understanding, though it can also be used for understanding of others). Anyway, not sure where specifically that kind of approach and focus comes from, though. And I'm not sure I get how nuance vs generalization is linked back to this particular discussion.You might think type is more clumsy and overly generalized than I do. My guess is that you see things in a more nuanced way. Maybe that's part of the difference between how INTJs and INFJs tend to think.