[NT] My Position Needs Clarifying

[Ezra]

You may not know that I've been around here since December 2007. I went through a long phase of not posting here, because I basically lost interest. Within the past few months, however, my interest in typology has been revived.

The last two threads I've created have been met with a generally negative reaction. I think I know why this is likely to be the case, but I'm not going to explain why - those who know why know better than I do, and thus it does not need to be discussed. What does need to be discussed is how I operate, so people will gain more of an appreciative understanding of the kind of material that I post. This doesn't necessarily mean one must read and reply to my threads; merely that if one does feel the need to reply, the reply should bear in mind the thread-originator's style.

When I post material, my principle aim is to generate discussion. I tend towards only those threads which interest me, and when I make comments which sound controversial, confused, contradictory or generalised, it's because I want to stimulate discussion. What I actually think or believe or feel about a particular subject is often of no consequence to the discussion, or has very little to do with what I actually say. What I say is designed to perpetuate, to continue, to motivate etc. In essence, I don't hold a position, and when I do, it is for a very good reason.

When people say that I pose questions then indiscriminately shoot the answers down, they are misinterpreting the situation. What I am doing is playing devil's advocate. I'm doing this because of the aforementioned explanation.

I hope this helps at least some of you to gain an insight into why I post what I do, and perhaps in the future to take a less personal view towards my posts.

 

[professor goodstain]

You may not know that I've been around here since December 2007. I went through a long phase of not posting here, because I basically lost interest. Within the past few months, however, my interest in typology has been revived.

The last two threads I've created have been met with a generally negative reaction. I think I know why this is likely to be the case, but I'm not going to explain why - those who know why know better than I do, and thus it does not need to be discussed. What does need to be discussed is how I operate, so people will gain more of an appreciative understanding of the kind of material that I post. This doesn't necessarily mean one must read and reply to my threads; merely that if one does feel the need to reply, the reply should bear in mind the thread-originator's style.

When I post material, my principle aim is to generate discussion. I tend towards only those threads which interest me, and when I make comments which sound controversial, confused, contradictory or generalised, it's because I want to stimulate discussion. What I actually think or believe or feel about a particular subject is often of no consequence to the discussion, or has very little to do with what I actually say. What I say is designed to perpetuate, to continue, to motivate etc. In essence, I don't hold a position, and when I do, it is for a very good reason.

When people say that I pose questions then indiscriminately shoot the answers down, they are misinterpreting the situation. What I am doing is playing devil's advocate. I'm doing this because of the aforementioned explanation.

I hope this helps at least some of you to gain an insight into why I post what I do, and perhaps in the future to take a less personal view towards my posts.

Your racism thread actually was gettin somewhere. I know you're not racist. It was shit on mostly because people on here are afraid of their inner self. And racism discusion can only bring out their insecureties. Or expose a possible facade. Observe keenly and you will find alot of threads that morph into a ("pseudosocialcircus"-goodstain). Which, in a overtly transparent fassion, harmoniously flows with their internal indoeuropean cognative thought construction. Folks on here live mainly complacent lives due to the fact that their main source of income comes from daddy. Keep your head up, and don't let any (Fe) suggest to others that you are appologetic.

 

[Ezra]

Haha, are you sure that's not just paranoia on your part? Cheers for the understanding nonetheless.

 

[pippi]

What I actually think or believe or feel about a particular subject is often of no consequence to the discussion, or has very little to do with what I actually say. What I say is designed to perpetuate, to continue, to motivate etc. In essence, I don't hold a position...

Thanks for clarifying that. Since you aren't going to say what you believe or mean what you say, I will no longer read any of your posts.

 

[Valiant]

I don't think i'd like to meet you in a dark alley or chitchat over coffee, but I do like your threads. I do understand your position. The only unnerving part about your presence is your avatar Gives me the creeps, somehow. Maybe because I am allergic to authoritarian people, and the guy in the avatar ( Brezhnev, isn't it?) looks like he's hard as granite and about to impose his will upon me

 

[Moiety]

I don't think i'd like to meet you in a dark alley or chitchat over coffee, but I do like your threads. I do understand your position. The only unnerving part about your presence is your avatar Gives me the creeps, somehow. Maybe because I am allergic to authoritarian people, and the guy in the avatar ( Brezhnev, isn't it?) looks like he's hard as granite and about to impose his will upon me

You ENTJs don't like competition, eh?