User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 47

Thread: ISFJ or INFJ?

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    25

    Default ISFJ or INFJ?

    I don't think it's really possible to be both because one uses Si+Ne and one uses Ni+Se, but I'm having a really hard time figuring out which of the two I am. or am I something else? So. I wanna see if y'all can help meh.

    -I can empathize with people REALLY easily. I feel like I know what they're going through without trying. This has often led me to be submissive or to ignore my own needs.
    -I can have a pretty hard time denying people my help or asserting myself. Examples: my SO occasionally has these big fights with another (female) friend of his. Because they are horrible at communication I'll spend my whole week listening to one rant and then go tell the other what they need to know to patch things up, back and forth. I feel very unappreciated for my deep understanding and peacemaking ablilites. Or when I'm angry and my family members and they ask me to do something, I automatically do it anyways.
    -I can size people up at a glance, usually by looking in their eyes.
    -Normally I have a hard time doing stuff I know will hurt people. Like telling stupid flirts to leave me alone or not talk to me. If I know someone really well though, I won't be nearly as careful with their feelings. I may even use my sharp logic and biting sarcasm (Ti?) to pick them to pieces.
    -I can extrovert pretty well at times. So much so that my ESTP sister thinks I'm an extrovert. When I extrovert, I usually come off as naive, bubbly, imaginative, highly spontaneous, silly, and careless of what people think of me. However, it's all a part of my plot. I'm usually doing it to keep the atmosphere happy and amusing and comfortable, so I am careful never to go too far. I can snap out of it into a different mode in a second if someone needs me to, like if my ESTP sister is going too far in her pranks and someone needs me to champion them.
    -Especially when I'm with a large group of friends, I always carefully monitor the environment even whilst I'm having fun to make sure no one is being treated badly. If they are, I immediately feel a kind of spicy anger which I channel into subtly both avenging them and making sure people include them/are nice to them.
    - I can size people up at a glance, usually by looking in their eyes. I almost never wrong.
    -If someone is feeling some kind of negative emotion, I immediately set to finding out why, often kind of obsessively. I can have a hard time consoling people or I feel awkward doing it, so I usually start by helping them talk through it, and once I have gauged the situation thus I use my silly humor to distract them and lighten their mood. Highly effective.
    -Over time I have developed the theory that nearly ALL conflict is the result of people not understanding each other. I am highly attuned to conflict or misunderstanding in the environment and I feel stressed until I work it out, and then usually for a while afterwords. it depresses me.
    -I yearn for emotional closeness when I care about ppl
    -I NEED time to myself to sort out my feelings
    -I'm good at languages, reading, ect, have always been huge on art, and love writing and inventing worlds
    -I'm good at picking up on the underlying principles or patterns in a situation
    -I like romantic books, but not cheesy or shallow romance. I've read like every classic novel out there, too
    -I LOVE thinking through complex problems, am really good at science, quick at picking up on math IF AND ONLY IF I understand the theory.
    -Since I was young, I've always been a deep thinker. I'd get in trouble for being disrespectful to my parents and cruel to my siblings if they were illogical
    -I looooove formal debate because I get to get to the root of a problem and annihilate it without people feeling hurt. I dislike debating about people's personal ideas because 1) I don't want to hurt them but more often 2) I don't want to be rejected for my ideas and worldview
    -interested in topics like history, philosophy, lit, politics, economics, psychology, ect
    -I have a hard time sharing how I feel or what I am thinking and I hate unloading my problems on people
    -I feel like I live for the future but I don't think about it very much. I'm always looking forward to the future, especially my years of higher education and then my family. However, it also scares me a little to think that I might not have my same friends
    -I am pretty ambitious academically. If I want to learn something or if I am intellectually curious about something, I will pursue it aggressively
    -I hate exerting myself physically so I exhaust myself, but I can easily forget to feed myself, rest, ect if I am doing something I love. I am good at things like sewing and cooking or any physical thing where I am not actually focusing on my body. Like soccer- if it engages me mentally I don't care so much about tiring myself

    Lol. Wow. That's enough for now. If you have questions, feel free to ask me. Hopefully this will be enough to make it pretty clear to you what I am. *sighs*

  2. #2
    Senior Member SubtleFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    260

    Default

    Hi there!

    Most of what you mentioned sounds very much like classic Fe-auxiliary. Since both INFJs and ISFJs have this, this won't help with distinguishing between the two.

    What you mentioned in the beginning is what I would recommend really delving into--the difference between Si/Se and Ni/Ne. INFJs have Ni as their dominant function, the function that they really see reality through. Si is their 8th function, meaning their weakest function. ISFJs, on the other hand, have Si as their dominant function and have Ni as their weakest function. So figuring out which one you favor will be key to getting closer to your true type.

    Here's some descriptions of Ni and Si:
    http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/in...intuiting.html
    http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/in...edsensing.html

    Also, here's a couple questions to ponder that may help:

    --Do you remember exactly, down to the specific side dishes and toppings and drinks, what you had for breakfast, lunch, and dinner yesterday?
    --Let's say you go to a doctor because you have pain in your torso that comes and goes, and it just happens that during your appointment, the pain isn't there at the moment. Your doctor asks you, "Can you point out where your pain usually is? And how often has it come and gone over the past week?"

    How easy is it for you to answer these questions? Could you answer them, but with great difficulty (like it's painful to do it). Or do these things come pretty easily?

    Hopefully this can help with how easy is it for you to use Si.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    You sound like such a sweet person Silverrose

    I think you're ENFJ; I see way to much Fe in your posts and descriptions about yourself; I also see Ni+Se reasoning rather than Si+Ne reasoning.

  4. #4
    Senior Member SubtleFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/so
    Posts
    260

    Default

    ^I don't know, I could be wrong, but I have a feeling she (?) isn't an Fe-dom. I know about a million Fe-doms and a couple Fe-auxiliaries besides myself, and there's a slightly different vibe in the way that Fe is used. Any kind of Fe is others-oriented, but Fe-auxiliary is especially so, since all auxiliary functions are more others-oriented than self-oriented (if you believe what Beebe says). The way that silverrose describes the Fe-qualities she (?) has seems more like the way I see Fe-auxiliaries use their Fe. I could be wrong, though.

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SubtleFighter View Post
    Hi there!

    Most of what you mentioned sounds very much like classic Fe-auxiliary. Since both INFJs and ISFJs have this, this won't help with distinguishing between the two. Phoo. I was so proud of myself for all that, lol.

    What you mentioned in the beginning is what I would recommend really delving into--the difference between Si/Se and Ni/Ne. INFJs have Ni as their dominant function, the function that they really see reality through. Si is their 8th function, meaning their weakest function. ISFJs, on the other hand, have Si as their dominant function and have Ni as their weakest function. So figuring out which one you favor will be key to getting closer to your true type. Yeah... it's just kind of hard because they are mostly subconscious functions as introverted dominant functions.

    Also, here's a couple questions to ponder that may help:

    --Do you remember exactly, down to the specific side dishes and toppings and drinks, what you had for breakfast, lunch, and dinner yesterday? Well, it takes me a few minutes to remember... I tend to remember events that I considered significant in some way. Those, I can remember in vivid detail, and almost as if I'm watching myself do stuff...

    --Let's say you go to a doctor because you have pain in your torso that comes and goes, and it just happens that during your appointment, the pain isn't there at the moment. Your doctor asks you, "Can you point out where your pain usually is? And how often has it come and gone over the past week?" I could probably answer the questions just fine, but I'd be pretty vague.

    How easy is it for you to answer these questions? Could you answer them, but with great difficulty (like it's painful to do it). Or do these things come pretty easily? Idk... some reason I'm having a hard time gauging it. I wonder if it's because I'm thinking too hard about it. It's not like super easy but it's not necessary hard, either, but I can't tell if it's because it's the process is easy or something else. The questions are easier to answer than a vague one asking for an example to prove some abstract point though. I can't come up with examples easily..

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Savage Idealist View Post
    You sound like such a sweet person Silverrose

    I think you're ENFJ; I see way to much Fe in your posts and descriptions about yourself; I also see Ni+Se reasoning rather than Si+Ne reasoning.
    Aww. *happy blush*

    Actually, I've never really related to ENFJ much. I don't find teaching others that appealing, nor am I that great at it. Maybe I do have Ne, cuz when I try to explain stuff it's usually far more garbled than it sounds in my head. And I'm often milessssss ahead of my classmates (or even teacher).

    ...You know, when I help people, it's not always cuz I like them or want to help them; it's more of a moral compulsion. like I HATE being ordered around and though I usually do as I'm told, I can be really hot-tempered about it.

  7. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SubtleFighter View Post
    ^I don't know, I could be wrong, but I have a feeling she (?) isn't an Fe-dom. I know about a million Fe-doms and a couple Fe-auxiliaries besides myself, and there's a slightly different vibe in the way that Fe is used. Any kind of Fe is others-oriented, but Fe-auxiliary is especially so, since all auxiliary functions are more others-oriented than self-oriented (if you believe what Beebe says). The way that silverrose describes the Fe-qualities she (?) has seems more like the way I see Fe-auxiliaries use their Fe. I could be wrong, though.
    Yeah, I've never been typed as or typed myself as any kind of Fe-dominant type... Usually Ne-dom, Ni-dom, or Ti-dom.

  8. #8
    You have a choice! 21%'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    2,632

    Default

    Hmmm... this is hard. A couple more questions would be helpful

    Can you describe what you were like when you were young? What did you use to do? What did your day consist of? What did you use to think about? (Let's say before you were 10)

    Can you describe the last time you couldn't figure out something? (Something that requires a lot of thinking, like a conflict, life problem, etc.) Do you remember your thought process? How did you come up with the solution? (Feel free to write a long response if you need to).

    What do you want from life?

    List all the things you think about each day and give each subject a percentage of the time spent on it.


    Not sure if this would help, but I'll try
    4w5 sp/sx EII

  9. #9
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    All I see here is Fe, Fe, Fe.

    But most likely in the aux position.

    So, since you're describing neither Ni nor Si clearly, how about you look at these:

    The Introverted Sensation Type

    The priority of introverted sensation produces a definite type, which is characterized by certain peculiarities. It is an irrational type, inasmuch as its selection among occurrences is not primarily rational, but is guided rather [p. 501] by what just happens. Whereas, the extraverted sensation-type is determined by the intensity of the objective influence, the introverted type is orientated by the intensity of the subjective sensation-constituent released by the objective stimulus. Obviously, therefore, no sort of proportional relation exists between object and sensation, but something that is apparently quite irregular and arbitrary judging from without, therefore, it is practically impossible to foretell what will make an impression and what will not. If there were present a capacity and readiness for expression in any way commensurate with the strength of sensation, the irrationality of this type would be extremely evident. This is the case, for instance, when the individual is a creative artist. But, since this is the exception, it usually happens that the characteristic introverted difficulty of expression also conceals his irrationality. On the contrary, he may actually stand out by the very calmness and passivity of his demeanour, or by his rational self-control. This peculiarity, which often leads the superficial judgment astray, is really due to his unrelatedness to objects. Normally the object is not consciously depreciated in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it, because it is immediately replaced by a subjective reaction, which is no longer related to the reality of the object. This, of course, has the same effect as a depreciation of the object. Such a type can easily make one question why one should exist at all; or why objects in general should have any right to existence, since everything essential happens without the object. This doubt may be justified in extreme cases, though not in the normal, since the objective stimulus is indispensable to his sensation, only it produces something different from what was to be surmised from the external state of affairs. Considered from without, it looks as though the effect of the object [p. 502] did not obtrude itself upon the subject. This impression is so far correct inasmuch as a subjective content does, in fact, intervene from the unconscious, thus snatching away the effect of the object. This intervention may be so abrupt that the individual appears to shield himself directly from any possible influence of the object. In any aggravated or well-marked case, such a protective guard is also actually present. Even with only a slight reinforcement of the unconscious, the subjective constituent of sensation becomes so alive that it almost completely obscures the objective influence. The results of this are, on the one hand, a feeling of complete depreciation on the part of the object, and, on the other, an illusory conception of reality on the part of the subject, which in morbid cases may even reach the point of a complete inability to discriminate between the real object and the subjective perception. Although so vital a distinction vanishes completely only in a practically psychotic state, yet long before that point is reached subjective perception may influence thought, feeling, and action to an extreme degree, in spite of the fact that the object is clearly seen in its fullest reality. Whenever the objective influence does succeed in forcing its way into the subject -- as the result of particular circumstances of special intensity, or because of a more perfect analogy with the unconscious image -- even the normal example of this type is induced to act in accordance with his unconscious model. Such action has an illusory quality in relation to objective reality, and therefore has a very odd and strange character. It instantly reveals the anti-real subjectivity of the type, But, where the influence of the object does not entirely succeed, it encounters a benevolent neutrality, disclosing little sympathy, yet constantly striving to reassure and adjust. The too-low is raised a little, the too-high is made a little lower; the enthusiastic is damped, the [p. 503] extravagant restrained; and the unusual brought within the 'correct' formula: all this in order to keep the influence of the object within the necessary bounds. Thus, this type becomes an affliction to his circle, just in so far as his entire harmlessness is no longer above suspicion. But, if the latter should be the case, the individual readily becomes a victim to the aggressiveness and ambitions of others. Such men allow themselves to be abused, for which they usually take vengeance at the most unsuitable occasions with redoubled stubbornness and resistance. When there exists no capacity for artistic expression, all impressions sink into the inner depths, whence they hold consciousness under a spell, removing any possibility it might have had of mastering the fascinating impression by means of conscious expression. Relatively speaking, this type has only archaic possibilities of expression for the disposal of his impressions; thought and feeling are relatively unconscious, and, in so far as they have a certain consciousness, they only serve in the necessary, banal, every-day expressions. Hence as conscious functions, they are wholly unfitted to give any adequate rendering of the subjective perceptions. This type, therefore, is uncommonly inaccessible to an objective understanding and he fares no better in the understanding of himself.

    Above all, his development estranges him from the reality of the object, handing him over to his subjective perceptions, which orientate his consciousness in accordance with an archaic reality, although his deficiency in comparative judgment keeps him wholly unaware of this fact. Actually he moves in a mythological world, where men animals, railways, houses, rivers, and mountains appear partly as benevolent deities and partly as malevolent demons. That thus they, appear to him never enters his mind, although their effect upon his judgments and acts can bear no other interpretation. He judges and acts as [p. 504] though he had such powers to deal with; but this begins to strike him only when he discovers that his sensations are totally different from reality. If his tendency is to reason objectively, he will sense this difference as morbid; but if, on the other hand, he remains faithful to his irrationality, and is prepared to grant his sensation reality value, the objective world will appear a mere make-belief and a comedy. Only in extreme cases, however, is this dilemma reached. As a rule, the individual acquiesces in his isolation and in the banality of the reality, which, however, he unconsciously treats archaically.

    His unconscious is distinguished chiefly by the repression of intuition, which thereby acquires an extraverted and archaic character. Whereas true extraverted intuition has a characteristic resourcefulness, and a 'good nose' for every possibility in objective reality, this archaic, extraverted intuition has an amazing flair for every ambiguous, gloomy, dirty, and dangerous possibility in the background of reality. In the presence of this intuition the real and conscious intention of the object has no significance; it will peer behind every possible archaic antecedent of such an intention. It possesses, therefore, something dangerous, something actually undermining, which often stands in most vivid contrast to the gentle benevolence of consciousness. So long as the individual is not too aloof from the object, the unconscious intuition effects a wholesome compensation to the rather fantastic and over credulous attitude of consciousness. But as soon as the unconscious becomes antagonistic to consciousness, such intuitions come to the surface and expand their nefarious influence: they force themselves compellingly upon the individual, releasing compulsive ideas about objects of the most perverse kind. The neurosis arising from this sequence of events is usually a compulsion neurosis, in which the hysterical characters recede and are obscured by symptoms of exhaustion. [p. 505]
    The Introverted Intuitive Type

    The peculiar nature of introverted intuition, when given the priority, also produces a peculiar type of man, viz. the mystical dreamer and seer on the one hand, or the fantastical crank and artist on the other. The latter might be regarded as the normal case, since there is a general tendency of this type to confine himself to the perceptive character of intuition. As a rule, the intuitive stops at perception; perception is his principal problem, and -- in the case of a productive artist-the shaping of perception. But the crank contents himself with the intuition by which he himself is shaped and determined. Intensification of intuition naturally often results in an extraordinary aloofness of the individual from tangible reality; he may even become a complete enigma to his own immediate circle. [p. 509]

    If an artist, he reveals extraordinary, remote things in his art, which in iridescent profusion embrace both the significant and the banal, the lovely and the grotesque, the whimsical and the sublime. If not an artist, he is frequently an unappreciated genius, a great man 'gone wrong', a sort of wise simpleton, a figure for 'psychological' novels.

    Although it is not altogether in the line of the introverted intuitive type to make of perception a moral problem, since a certain reinforcement of the rational functions is required for this, yet even a relatively slight differentiation of judgment would suffice to transfer intuitive perception from the purely æsthetic into the moral sphere. A variety of this type is thus produced which differs essentially from its æsthetic form, although none the less characteristic of the introverted intuitive. The moral problem comes into being when the intuitive tries to relate himself to his vision, when he is no longer satisfied with mere perception and its æsthetic shaping and estimation, but confronts the question: What does this mean for me and for the world? What emerges from this vision in the way of a duty or task, either for me or for the world? The pure intuitive who represses judgment or possesses it only under the spell of perception never meets this question fundamentally, since his only problem is the How of perception. He, therefore, finds the moral problem unintelligible, even absurd, and as far as possible forbids his thoughts to dwell upon the disconcerting vision. It is different with the morally orientated intuitive. He concerns himself with the meaning of his vision; he troubles less about its further æsthetic possibilities than about the possible moral effects which emerge from its intrinsic significance. His judgment allows him to discern, though often only darkly, that he, as a man and as a totality, is in some way inter-related with his vision, that [p. 510] it is something which cannot just be perceived but which also would fain become the life of the subject. Through this realization he feels bound to transform his vision into his own life. But, since he tends to rely exclusively upon his vision, his moral effort becomes one-sided; he makes himself and his life symbolic, adapted, it is true, to the inner and eternal meaning of events, but unadapted to the actual present-day reality. Therewith he also deprives himself of any influence upon it, because he remains unintelligible. His language is not that which is commonly spoken -- it becomes too subjective. His argument lacks convincing reason. He can only confess or pronounce. His is the 'voice of one crying in the wilderness'.

    The introverted intuitive's chief repression falls upon the sensation of the object. His unconscious is characterized by this fact. For we find in his unconscious a compensatory extraverted sensation function of an archaic character. The unconscious personality may, therefore, best be described as an extraverted sensation-type of a rather low and primitive order. Impulsiveness and unrestraint are the characters of this sensation, combined with an extraordinary dependence upon the sense impression. This latter quality is a compensation to the thin upper air of the conscious attitude, giving it a certain weight, so that complete 'sublimation' is prevented. But if, through a forced exaggeration of the conscious attitude, a complete subordination to the inner perception should develop, the unconscious becomes an opposition, giving rise to compulsive sensations whose excessive dependence upon the object is in frank conflict with the conscious attitude. The form of neurosis is a compulsion-neurosis, exhibiting symptoms that are partly hypochondriacal manifestations, partly hypersensibility of the sense organs and partly compulsive ties to definite persons or other objects. [p. 511]
    AND

    Si (ISxJ): Life must be familiar to my storehouse of data
    Ni (INxJ): Life must have an underlying significance inferred by me

    ISxJ's might feel inferior in new possibilities.
    INxJ's might feel inferior with current tangible experience.

    ISxJ's Cling to dominant perspective. Criticize NP's as irresponsible regarding learned knowledge
    INxJ's Cling to dominant perspective. Criticize SP's as reckless

    http://www.erictb.info/archetypes.html

  10. #10
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    Hmmm... this is hard. A couple more questions would be helpful.
    Oh boy, I get to talk about me. :p

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    Can you describe what you were like when you were young? What did you use to do? What did your day consist of? What did you use to think about? (Let's say before you were 10)
    Ah.. well, I am still suffering the effects of my childhood reputation now. I don't think I had ANY Fe (or at least it did not manifest itself as it does now). I was very outspoken, prideful, and had no consideration for others whatsoever. I did prefer to be by myself though, and taught myself to read at three. I liked to hunt bugs and animals outside in my backyard and capture them (I feared nothing, lol), to read books about wildlife or fiction, to draw and invent stories, and to play Robin Hood or games based off of movies with my sisters using home-made costumes, or play with our stuffed animals.

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    Can you describe the last time you couldn't figure out something? (Something that requires a lot of thinking, like a conflict, life problem, etc.) Do you remember your thought process? How did you come up with the solution? (Feel free to write a long response if you need to).
    What do you want from life?[/QUOTE] Trying to figure out my SO's relationship with myself and three other friends. It was a combination of analyzing all of my experiences with him, what I do know about him, numbing myself to the possibility that he might not like me, making myself not care for a while so I could be objective, and just waiting for events to unfold.
    Usually in a problematic situation, I try first to gather everything I know about a situation and objectively analyze it to make sure it really is a problem and not me being ridiculous. I usually conclude that I'm being ridiculous from a logical perspective but realize that emotionally I've got a problem to be worked through. So I kind of get in a loop where I'm obsessing over all the possible scenarios that could be going on. Yeah, I don't have a lot of "big" problems. Where I get into trouble is when I don't know what is going on in a situation or I don't see an end to an uncomfortable scenario... maybe that's Ne going wacko and refusing to be smashed into place by Ti.

    ...ftr I am still in my teen years so that might skew things a little.

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    List all the things you think about each day and give each subject a percentage of the time spent on it.
    Um....hahah... do I really want people to know how unproductive I am? it really varies a lot depending on what's going on. I'm almost always doing something, and my thoughts are tied to that. When I'm not doing schoolwork, I'm talking to my friends (mainly my SO) and I'll think about how things are going between us; I'll listen to music (I just feel when I am), I read philosophic novels/pieces (like Michael O'Brien or Chesterton or Socrates) and entertain the questions they lead me to ask, I read economic or political stuff and think about solving the problems they pose, and I think about personality and psychology and my problems and stuff... I don't know if I can give percentages. Usually I devote myself to one or two of those a day.

    Quote Originally Posted by 21% View Post
    Not sure if this would help, but I'll try
    Thanks a ton.

Similar Threads

  1. Please help me! (ISFJ or INFJ)
    By Rhonorix in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-28-2014, 02:14 PM
  2. Hello am I an Isfj or infj?
    By bohemian in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-20-2014, 03:55 PM
  3. ISFJ or INFJ?
    By PeaceAndMusic in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 11-05-2012, 05:12 PM
  4. Type my friend: ISFJ or INFJ?
    By SilentStream in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 11-04-2009, 07:30 AM
  5. [MBTItm] ENTPs & Relationships: ISFJ or INFJ?
    By fill in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-10-2009, 12:16 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