User Tag List

View Poll Results: What type are you?

Voters
242. You may not vote on this poll
  • INTP

    61 25.21%
  • INTJ

    44 18.18%
  • ENTP

    10 4.13%
  • ENTJ

    3 1.24%
  • INFP

    33 13.64%
  • INFJ

    27 11.16%
  • ENFP

    12 4.96%
  • ENFJ

    9 3.72%
  • ISTP

    9 3.72%
  • ISTJ

    6 2.48%
  • ESTP

    2 0.83%
  • ESTJ

    1 0.41%
  • ISFP

    1 0.41%
  • ISFJ

    3 1.24%
  • ESFP

    0 0%
  • ESFJ

    2 0.83%
  • I am unsure despite not being new to MBTI

    3 1.24%
  • I identify as borderline

    16 6.61%
First 678910 Last

Results 71 to 80 of 151

  1. #71
    Senior Member htb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,506

    Default

    That was a fine soliloquy, Substitute.


    Speaking of which, we need more of this:

    Moderately introverted.
    Distinctively intuitive.
    Distinctively thinking.
    Very judging.

  2. #72
    Senior Member Dark Razor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    8w7
    Socionics
    ENTj
    Posts
    271

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    If I were a sensor, I don't think I'd want to embrace a system that seemed to classify me as basically just some kind of cattle-minion while my idle waster of a student son who sits there on the sofa surrounded by his own mess, is apparently a 'visionary' and 'world changer'.

  3. #73
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Thinking 95 (Thorough-going
    Introversion 90 (Thorough-going)
    Intuition 85 (Less radical, yet still distinctly expressed)
    Perceiving 75 (Moderately expressed)
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  4. #74
    only bites when provoked
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,127

    Default

    See my signature.

    I - I don't really like doing anything social except with people I know well.
    N - Mostly N, but I can sometimes add appearance to function/efficiency requirements, therefore my world is not too freaky.
    T - Mostly T, but with a little bit of a soft, gooey center.
    J - Least preference, but still pretty strong. I can be creative and discerning.
    I 100%, N 88%, T 88%, J 75%

    Disclaimer: The above is my opinion and mine alone, it does not mean I cannot change my mind, nor does it guarantee that my comments are related to any deep-seated convictions. Take everything I say with a whole snowplow worth of salt and call me in the morning, if you can.

  5. #75
    Dhampyr Economica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    yeah I know, you HAVE got your point across, you're doing that thing of assuming that cos I don't agree, I must therefore not properly understand what you're saying
    D'you know, for the first time I actually feel discriminated against on the basis of type. And by an ENTP!

    I don't necessarily expect agreement, but you demonstrate in two ways that you haven't properly understood my point:

    To assume that nobody cares just because you don't is a mistake, I reckon. There's already been people saying they do care, and if it weren't so INTx dominated here then maybe there'd be even more people who care. And maybe there are lots reading, but not posting, who care.
    1) I use the term "clutter" about the strength of preferences posts, not because of my subjective judgment (like I said, live and let live), but because it can be observed that most people don't care about them (no followups and people write repeat posts).

    I do appreciate that a few people have verbalized that they value the posts and that there could be many more who are silent, but like I said, the posts could go in a different thread and no one would be worse off.

    I think 'unseen harm' is a bit of a strong term to use - after all, there's nothing stopping you superior folks from having whatever discussion you like, alongside the fluff.
    2) If the harm was obvious, it wouldn't be "unseen". True, nothing is physically stopping anyone from discussing whatever they like. However, the incentives to start and continue a quality discussion are poor in a thread full of clutter. When incentives to do something are poor, you don't get a lot of that behavior.

    Oh, and for the record, I use "harm" in the qualitative sense, not in the "if we don't raise quality of discussion in this thread soon we will all be doomed I tell you DOOMED!" sense. :steam:

    And besides, I don't see how there really is much to say about the distribution of types on this site, besides INTPc influx and the fact it hasn't been going long enough yet for most non-INTx's to know about it. It's all a bit too obvious to merit discussion... [...]
    Your point about how little there is to say about the type distribution may be a good one, but then again, we'll never know what we are missing out on.

    Oh, that, and the way the profiles are written in such a way that they're hugely biased towards intuitives, presenting them 'at their best' while presenting 'average' sensors. If I were a sensor, I don't think I'd want to embrace a system that seemed to classify me as basically just some kind of cattle-minion while my idle waster of a student son who sits there on the sofa surrounded by his own mess, is apparently a 'visionary' and 'world changer'.
    Okay, NOW you can accuse me of acting true to my type's faults all you want, because I have to say that I wrote that first!

  6. #76
    will make your day Carebear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    1,449

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Economica View Post
    1) I use the term "clutter" about the strength of preferences posts, not because of my subjective judgment (like I said, live and let live), but because it can be observed that most people don't care about them (no followups and people write repeat posts).
    People could care even if they don't write followups. Think of it as a listing thread, not a discussion thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Economica View Post
    I do appreciate that a few people have verbalized that they value the posts and that there could be many more who are silent, but like I said, the posts could go in a different thread and no one would be worse off.
    You have failed to answer why this couldn't have been the "different thread". It looked like a statistics thread from the start and hadn't you insisted on a new course for it, it would have been exactly like the "different thread" you ask for. Why couldn't you instead of interrupting the listing have created a new thread named "Discussions about the impact of the spread of the types on this board" or something similar?

    You are discussing as if we haven't gotten your point when in fact we disagree, so where does the "discriminated against on the basis of my type" bull come from? If anything you were discriminated against on the basis of your words/actions, though how this could be called discrimination, I fail to see.

    Quote Originally Posted by Economica View Post
    2) If the harm was obvious, it wouldn't be "unseen". True, nothing is physically stopping anyone from discussing whatever they like. However, the incentives to start and continue a quality discussion are poor in a thread full of clutter. When incentives to do something are poor, you don't get a lot of that behavior.
    You're operating from a premise that this thread was to be a quality discussion like you imagined it, but as you see if you scroll up, noone else shared that premise until you decided to take action and tried to control the thread in a certain direction. You didn't have to, it would have been easier and more productive to let this thread develop naturally as statistical "clutter" and start a new one where you clearly stated the premise for the thread.

  7. #77
    Dhampyr Economica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carebear View Post
    You have failed to answer why this couldn't have been the "different thread". It looked like a statistics thread from the start and hadn't you insisted on a new course for it, it would have been exactly like the "different thread" you ask for. Why couldn't you instead of interrupting the listing have created a new thread named "Discussions about the impact of the spread of the types on this board" or something similar?
    Because the poll is in this thread.

    You are discussing as if we haven't gotten your point when in fact we disagree, so where does the "discriminated against on the basis of my type" bull come from? If anything you were discriminated against on the basis of your words/actions, though how this could be called discrimination, I fail to see.
    My reasons for feeling discriminated against by substitute are stated in my previous post (#75). True, a lack of followups is not in itself conclusive, but neither one of you has addressed the issue of repeat posts or demonstrated an understanding of the concept of unseen harm as it applies here.

    You're operating from a premise that this thread was to be a quality discussion like you imagined it, but as you see if you scroll up, noone else shared that premise until you decided to take action and tried to control the thread in a certain direction. You didn't have to, it would have been easier and more productive to let this thread develop naturally as statistical "clutter" and start a new one where you clearly stated the premise for the thread.
    True, my original endeavor to stop the strength of preferences posts was futile. I have learned to write more instructive OPs in the future.

  8. #78
    Senior Member substitute's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,601

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Economica View Post
    My reasons for feeling discriminated against by substitute are stated in my previous post (#75). True, a lack of followups is not in itself conclusive, but neither one of you has addressed the issue of repeat posts or demonstrated an understanding of the concept of unseen harm as it applies here.
    I didn't answer cos I thought it was pointless. I knew damn well I wasn't discrimminating and wasn't even thinking of your type when I said you were 'doing that thing' - I didn't mention your type and wasn't thinking it. The rest of the sentence, if there were any, would've been 'that thing that I've noticed people do sometimes'.

    And I thought Carebear summed it up nicely with this:

    Quote Originally Posted by Carebear
    You are discussing as if we haven't gotten your point when in fact we disagree, so where does the "discriminated against on the basis of my type" bull come from? If anything you were discriminated against on the basis of your words/actions, though how this could be called discrimination, I fail to see.
    Which were my thoughts exactly.

    The 'issue' of repeat posts was addressed (said it didn't bother us) and I did address your 'unseen harm' thing, but where I meant that the 'harm' part was a bit OTT, you thought I was questioning the 'unseen' part. Seen or unseen, I don't think it's 'harmful'. That was my evaluation: it's not harmful, to say it is, is IMO a bit overly dramatic.

    I just figured you were getting a bit uptight about something that really didn't matter, so I thought I'd leave it be for a while and see if you got your perspective back. I know how it can be when something doesn't turn out how I want it and I can get all bent outta shape, and I can spend way too much time trying to scoop up the fragments of the abortive attempt and make it work, if only cos I can't stand to have not got something right, when it would've been better to just leave it be and try again. I thought you were doing the same thing and thought the best thing to do to help was make it easier for you to drop it; I sympathised, so shoot me.
    Ils se d�merdent, les mecs: trop bon, trop con..................................MY BLOG!

    "When it all comes down to dust
    I will kill you if I must
    I will help you if I can" - Leonard Cohen

  9. #79
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carebear View Post
    Waddayamean? He's a pure 1(00)% intuitive then! Clear N. Nothing to see here, move on!


    Well, in real life you're going to see somehow who looks very ambivalent in half the situations (with a very very slight leaning towards N) -- and someone whom in the other half of the situations will look VERY S.

    So you'll mistake him visually for an S, although technically he's N!

    .... i hate these tests... :steam:

    [looks over rest of thread]

    ...What on earth are you three fighting about...?? <mind-boggle> It seems to be an awful lot of qualification over something that doesn't seem very important for the general use of the thread... but maybe it's just me. Oh well... carry on!
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #80
    Dhampyr Economica's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    2,054

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by substitute View Post
    I didn't answer cos I thought it was pointless. I knew damn well I wasn't discrimminating and wasn't even thinking of your type when I said you were 'doing that thing' - I didn't mention your type and wasn't thinking it.
    You mentioned my type in post #54 and wrote that I was "doing that thing" (=classic INTJ flaw) just hours later.

    The 'issue' of repeat posts was addressed (said it didn't bother us) and I did address your 'unseen harm' thing, but where I meant that the 'harm' part was a bit OTT, you thought I was questioning the 'unseen' part. Seen or unseen, I don't think it's 'harmful'. That was my evaluation: it's not harmful, to say it is, is IMO a bit overly dramatic.
    Repeat posts is a sign that people consider the strength of preferences posts to be clutter. This aspect has not been addressed.

    Throughout this thread I have made clear that the issue of the SOP posts is no big deal to me and that I was just pointing out the objective evidence that people consider them to be clutter. Focusing on the OTT'ness of the word "harm" when "unseen harm" is clearly a historical term is therefore a strawman, making me out to be all anal when in fact all I have been doing is goodnaturedly arguing an academic point... that you demonstrated not understanding when you wrote "there's nothing stopping you superior folks from having whatever discussion you like".

    Incidentally, aren't you going to comment on the remarkable similarity between our two posts about S vs. N profiles? I was expecting some form of acknowledgment that great minds think alike.

Similar Threads

  1. [ENFP] ENFPs:What type are you most attracted to? (romantic)
    By Chloe in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 78
    Last Post: 07-24-2009, 07:01 AM
  2. For those born in October: What type are you?
    By hommefatal in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-12-2009, 02:01 PM
  3. what type are you? [site demographics]
    By Chimerical in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 04-10-2009, 01:12 AM
  4. What type are you crushing on right now?
    By Rangler in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 02-19-2009, 12:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO