[INTP] INTP Central

[Eldanen]

I don't think there are too many risks of that. It's rather like any defection game. INTPc is a monopoly, MBTIc is not. All MBTIc needs is moderate policing to break up any of the strong cliques that would begin the "monolithic" nature of INTPc. The mods have been doing that pretty well, from what I have seen!

MBTIc, I believe, has grown too big to really have this as a problem. Least, without external support for it (please see: Reputation). So long as there are multiple and malleable camps, MBTIc will do fine. The size now can handle the various "underground" social camps and beliefs.

The only thing that I see as a risk for MBTIc is the forum drivers - the top 10% of posters and their content.

There are cliques? I wish someone would PM me and inform me of the internal drama going on. For some reason I never notice it in any social area.

 

[Jack Flak]

Here at MBTIc we have the cool crowd and the squares. I like to think I belong to both coalitions, being that I'm half cool and half smart.

 

[Eldanen]

I see. Someone list me the members!

 

[Jack Flak]

I can't think of any cool ppl right now, I'll get back to you. Try INTP Central. LOL JUST KIDDING.

 

[ptgatsby]

We do? If it happens, it's mostly by accident.

Emergent behaviour due to a non-monolithic group is not by accident. The dynamics are simply different enough.

An example of this is the "Sexual harrassment" thread. That is effectively what needs to be kept in line (and the mod dynamics are vastly different in handling it/supporting that kind of issue). IOW, "deal with it yourself" = INTPc, because otherwise you are soft and emotional and blah blah. And at INTPc, attacks on that kind of statement (that was semi-starting here) would be justification for many people to start pushing the line for no reason.

It's difficult to engineer complex (and group dynamics is hella complex) issues. But the big factors trickle down.

 

[Bufo]

INTPc is like a nation-state while MBTIc is like the world itself.

 

[Salomé]

Here at MBTIc we have the cool crowd and the squares. I like to think I belong to both coalitions, being that I'm half cool and half smart.

Also half-right.

What about half-arsed?

 

[ptgatsby]

There are cliques? I wish someone would PM me and inform me of the internal drama going on. For some reason I never notice it in any social area.

Huh? I was saying that MBTIc has a notable lack of them, in terms of how they express themselves. There are groups of common beliefs, etc. and that's fine and normal. They just need to remain that way.

So, all MBTIc needs is to keep the cliques from forming. Giving any one dominant group/attitude (a group bound by attitude, or social network) too much social power. And I think it is large enough that very little needs to be done now (but some stuff would be... a bad idea)

 

[Salomé]

An example of this is the "Sexual harrassment" thread. That is effectively what needs to be kept in line (and the mod dynamics are vastly different in handling it/supporting that kind of issue). IOW, "deal with it yourself" = INTPc, because otherwise you are soft and emotional and blah blah. And at INTPc, attacks on that kind of statement (that was semi-starting here) would be justification for many people to start pushing the line for no reason.

If, by that unintelligible phase, you're talking about my attempts to seek clarification on the policy, you are incorrect in your assessment.

 

[MacGuffin]

Emergent behaviour due to a non-monolithic group is not by accident. The dynamics are simply different enough.

An example of this is the "Sexual harrassment" thread. That is effectively what needs to be kept in line (and the mod dynamics are vastly different in handling it/supporting that kind of issue). IOW, "deal with it yourself" = INTPc, because otherwise you are soft and emotional and blah blah. And at INTPc, attacks on that kind of statement (that was semi-starting here) would be justification for many people to start pushing the line for no reason.

I that specific situation I'll agree with the second half (pushing for no reason) but not the first half ("deal with it yourself"). Most of that is because how we dealt with it there was more private and off the public forums.

 

[ptgatsby]

I that specific situation I'll agree with the second half (pushing for no reason) but not the first half ("deal with it yourself"). Most of that is because how we dealt with it there was more private and off the public forums.

I was referring to any public comment about "I feel...". It wasn't the mods that I think encouraged it, to be clear. Mods did take it off the board (the few times they didn't... whoa.) The implication was that anyone who brought it up couldn't handle it (and towards when I left, was "so leave".)

In any case, the difference is fairly notable - the way you mods work things out is notably different, and that goes for public and private (obviously I don't know the machinery behind it, but it *feels* different, based on the outcomes involved.)

edit: An example is how brutal calling down a clique on INTPc would be if their behavior isn't appropriate. It's not always nice here, but it's way easier for the mods to "do their job" here, so to speak. (Easier as in, more flexible, more options )

 

[Tallulah]

Mac, you're asking for feedback about INTPc, but then you're arguing the feedback down. Why not take it for what it is? All feedback is subjective, and everyone's perceptions will be slightly different. But people in this thread are basically telling you why they don't want to be at INTPc, and you're not really listening to them.

I don't see any danger of MBTIc becoming a mirror of INTPc. I haven't noticed INTPs banding together to try and form a clique or bully anyone or do anything that might cause concern. The other types tend to do a pretty good job of speaking out when they don't agree, on any subject. Plus, as noted earlier, INTPs are awesome. Why would you want to make them go away?

I think that this place has a different atmosphere than INTPc, and some will prefer this, some that, and some both. I've told you my reasons before for preferring this place, but I've also posted in Haight's thread on this subject.

 

[MacGuffin]

Mac, you're asking for feedback about INTPc, but then you're arguing the feedback down. Why not take it for what it is? All feedback is subjective, and everyone's perceptions will be slightly different. But people in this thread are basically telling you why they don't want to be at INTPc, and you're not really listening to them.

Mostly I'm trying to clarify. Does it really appear I'm not listening?

 

[digesthisickness]

tallulah's right, mac. you are greatly underestimating every other type's mouth.

 

[INTJMom]

...
Why this forum in particular then? There's even faster forums out there.

Really, what are they?
Got links?

 

[Tallulah]

Mostly I'm trying to clarify. Does it really appear I'm not listening?

Well, I think it looks like you're somewhat listening, but it does kinda look like you're also picking holes in certain "arguments." Like if they really thought about it, they'd retract.

For instance, I think if someone feels like there are cliques there, but not so much here, what they're saying may be more along the lines that they don't notice them as much here, or that the cliques here are more accepting of newcomers. But arguing that cliques also exist here doesn't really help to clarify that there's still a reason the person prefers it here, and it has to do with cliques. It just makes them have to defend their statement as true and provable, when they thought they were just giving personal feedback.

 

[INTJMom]

The word on the street is that it's a pretty sweet place.

Can you verify this?

It's VERY sweet.

 

[MacGuffin]

tallulah's right, mac. you are greatly underestimating every other type's mouth.

It's not so much they'd shut up, but what they'd say with a large concentration of INTPs around.

Really, what are they?
Got links?

Yeah, but many are quite vulgar.

Well, I think it looks like you're somewhat listening, but it does kinda look like you're also picking holes in certain "arguments." Like if they really thought about it, they'd retract.

For instance, I think if someone feels like there are cliques there, but not so much here, what they're saying may be more along the lines that they don't notice them as much here, or that the cliques here are more accepting of newcomers. But arguing that cliques also exist here doesn't really help to clarify that there's still a reason the person prefers it here, and it has to do with cliques. It just makes them have to defend their statement as true and provable, when they thought they were just giving personal feedback.

Does asking questions feel like counter-argument? While I can do the Socratic method to this end, I don't believe I have done so here. How do I encourage a back-and-forth? Maybe it is impossible without appearing to pick holes as well.

I haven't written about the existence/non-existence of cliques at MBTIc except to ask ptgatsby about our moderation efforts. I believe the only time I disagreed outright with a serious remark turned out to be a misunderstanding (ptgatsby was talking about "I feel" statements when I thought he was talking about sexual harassment).

 

[INTJMom]

...
Yeah, but many are quite vulgar.
...

That's okay.
I've got a filter.
You're not the only one who is noticing this place is being flooded with INTPs.

 

[digesthisickness]

what i'm saying, mac, is that you're underestimating other types when it comes to defending themselves.

they seem to take care of balance here quite effectively.