Mistyped TypeCentral Members

[skimpit]

[MENTION=33777]Charus[/MENTION]:

INTP seems right.

Whaddya say?

 

[Chase123]

Clearly an ISTP.

Interesting because I've taken a break for a while and really think that I'm an ISTP 9w8 or 6w5. I really resonate to characters and people who share that type/enneagram. If I may ask what made you come to that conclusion?

 

[Peter Deadpan]

[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] seems ST, S-dominant. Lots of straight info and data, high investment in metrics and provability (Te). I'm uncertain at this point if this is SeTe or SiTe, but I lean SiTe because of an apparent discomfort with things (information, definitions, etc) not aligning with what is known and previously defined. He also seems to be building a system based from information already available rather than actively seeking out novel information/experience, so SiTe would make sense.

I don't claim to be an expert on function typing, but ST is really all I'm seeing.

S and N dominants have "missing information/missing picture" syndrome and tend to only see half the board. This is not an insult... all types have an equal deficit in some way.

 

[RadicalDoubt]

[MENTION=29921]awbro[/MENTION] I think the ISFJ typing fits you better than ENTP from what I've seen from you (although I could easily see ISTJ or INTP with accented Si working for you as well based on our interactions). I only mention this because I see you've retyped as such.

 

[Vendrah]

[MENTION=32874]Vendrah[/MENTION] seems ST, S-dominant. Lots of straight info and data, high investment in metrics and provability (Te). I'm uncertain at this point if this is SeTe or SiTe, but I lean SiTe because of an apparent discomfort with things (information, definitions, etc) not aligning with what is known and previously defined. He also seems to be building a system based from information already available rather than actively seeking out novel information/experience, so SiTe would make sense.

I don't claim to be an expert on function typing, but ST is really all I'm seeing.

S and N dominants have "missing information/missing picture" syndrome and tend to only see half the board. This is not an insult... all types have an equal deficit in some way.

EDIT: "Softned" the message.

I had create 3 different systems of typing, personally I am actually on the 6th but 3 remain in private.
I am the guy swimming against the current.
So that must be Si and Te, right? Super traditional! Well, not really.

Anyway, I dont think we should extend this conversation, because I know you are extending an unhappy conversation that comes from the Sum Typing thread and another part coming from the graveyard. I know you didnt came here to clarify my type - that is super obvious. I rather not even try to figure out your motives here because I fear what they might be.

 

[Vendrah]

[MENTION=29921]awbro[/MENTION] I think the ISFJ typing fits you better than ENTP from what I've seen from you (although I could easily see ISTJ or INTP with accented Si working for you as well based on our interactions). I only mention this because I see you've retyped as such.

[MENTION=29921]awbro[/MENTION] is super difficult to type XD.
I had suggested EXXP earlier, but I am somewhat unsure.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

I've been mistyped as something, whereas I'm a fake in everything. Sorry.

 

[miss deceit]

Hmm, out of the people on this page:
[MENTION=34313]RadicalDoubt[/MENTION] I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am curious as to why you type as ISFJ in MBTI yet LII in Socionics. The main reason I ask of this is because the way you communicate reminds me a lot of Robo/Bismuth's forum posts, have you considered being SEI in Socionics?
[MENTION=29921]awbro[/MENTION] Idk what you are, but reading through the way you explain certain things I'd just go broadly with IxxJ of some sort for now.

Charus I believe to be an IxFP of some sort based on interactions I have had with the individual on other forums.

If anyone has any typings of me, bring em on.

 

[Peter Deadpan]

EDIT: "Softned" the message.

I had create 3 different systems of typing, personally I am actually on the 6th but 3 remain in private.
I am the guy swimming against the current.
So that must be Si and Te, right? Super traditional! Well, not really.

Anyway, I dont think we should extend this conversation, because I know you are extending an unhappy conversation that comes from the Sum Typing thread and another part coming from the graveyard. I know you didnt came here to clarify my type - that is super obvious. I rather not even try to figure out your motives here because I fear what they might be.

I'm actually not upset about anything, other than the fact that the mods continue to take an authoritarian approach to censoring the forum and exerting control where none is needed. I don't dislike you, nor am I "out to get you". I actually went back and edited my own message after the fact to soften some edges as well, not because I intended to be harsh originally, but because I don't always filter things that way in the first place. Also, like I said, I claim no super powers for typing functions. I can see certain things pretty clearly, but sometimes it takes me awhile to filter through details or nuances.

I was unaware that you had developed so many systems. I think that would potentially lead me to conclude Se is more appropriate. I would still stick with Se for the time being because all I'm really seeing from you is pretty concrete stuff.

For the record, I'm not in the "intuitives are better than sensors" camp, so if for some reason you felt offended, just know that that's not a message I deliver.

You certainly don't have to agree with me. I wouldn't if someone said some shit to me that didn't make sense (although I also don't feel offended by others' typings of me anymore... it's not super personal or tied to my identity). You also don't have to like me if you don't want to.

 

[RadicalDoubt]

Hmm, out of the people on this page:
[MENTION=34313]RadicalDoubt[/MENTION] I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am curious as to why you type as ISFJ in MBTI yet LII in Socionics. The main reason I ask of this is because the way you communicate reminds me a lot of Robo/Bismuth's forum posts, have you considered being SEI in Socionics?

I have considered it and am actually looking into the possibility currently. Definitions of the functions from mbti to socionics differ to a notable degree. Currently, it's easier to see myself in Ti than Si (as I'm very quick to neglect my personal comfort and socionics Si really gets into the more abstract attentiveness to sensation and having like, deep impressions of things which is something I don't experience at all whereas mbti Si is a bit more watered down and defines a style of thought I guess). I also have difficulty seeing high dimensional Fi (and have considered and been video typed as Fi polR before) because, like Se, how Fi is described in socionics is completely foreign to the way I experience the world. Nonetheless, I know considerably less about socionics than the mbti, so as I get deeper into it I may realize I'm wrong and type as something else (ie. IEI, SEI, maybe even SLE may be alternative possibilities if LII seems incorrect, I just have to get more versed in the theory as I've had very little time with school to do so). People tend to vary on their mbti type and socionics type, but I can definitely see how my variance might be too separated to work. In terms of mbti anyways, I tend to consider myself somewhat of a jumper anyways (ie. With the more fluid stack/what I've heard about objective personality I may be Si-Ti-Other functions rather than truly high/well developed Fe).

 

[miss deceit]

I have considered it and am actually looking into the possibility currently. Definitions of the functions from mbti to socionics differ to a notable degree. Currently, it's easier to see myself in Ti than Si (as I'm very quick to neglect my personal comfort and socionics Si really gets into the more abstract attentiveness to sensation and having like, deep impressions of things which is something I don't experience at all whereas mbti Si is a bit more watered down and defines a style of thought I guess). I also have difficulty seeing high dimensional Fi (and have considered and been video typed as Fi polR before) because, like Se, how Fi is described in socionics is completely foreign to the way I experience the world. Nonetheless, I know considerably less about socionics than the mbti, so as I get deeper into it I may realize I'm wrong and type as something else (ie. IEI, SEI, maybe even SLE may be alternative possibilities if LII seems incorrect, I just have to get more versed in the theory as I've had very little time with school to do so). People tend to vary on their mbti type and socionics type, but I can definitely see how my variance might be too separated to work. In terms of mbti anyways, I tend to consider myself somewhat of a jumper anyways (ie. With the more fluid stack/what I've heard about objective personality I may be Si-Ti-Other functions rather than truly high/well developed Fe).

Hmm regarding those alternative possibilities, I would say if IEI, SEI and LII are in consideration SLE probably shouldn't be. IEI, SEI and LII all have weak Se in common (LII being Se PoLR, IEI also having 1D Se though duals can often mistype as each other and while SEI has 3D Se, it runs in antithesis to their lead function so Si is always their preferred method of sensing - Se leads would have that in reverse neglecting Si comfort in order to exert their Se pressure). I think either way you value Si/Ne.

Do you have any opinion on my type since I've given a few on yours? In regards to MBTI/Socionics of course, we did have a good discussion about enneagram a while back though. I'm absolutely confident now on valuing Se/Ni but I honestly could see 4 or 5 of those types as fitting, being EIE, LIE, ILI (which I could see in both socionics and their "equivalents" in MBTI) and then in socionics I could also see SLE and SEE tbh (although probably not Ti PoLR, but it's been suggested) - that being said the first 3 are definitely the 3 most likely imo.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

I thought I was a 9w1, but I think I’m an IxFP 9w8. I have a strong urge and tendency to push people’s buttons in order to spur action and/or debate, then to back off into a a more general, diplomatic, let’s-be-friends approach.

I am very reserved and tend to let others speak, until I feel there is injustice or ignorance dominating, at which point I can’t help leaping into a more provocative and aggressive stance, only to revert to my previous default once I’ve pushed some buttons and hopefully planted seeds of contemplation in others. The sudden switch to assertiveness sometimes surprises my colleagues, as I’m otherwise very laid back.

It might also explain my tendency to sometimes retreat into binges of hedonistic pleasures only to later return to my monk-like headspace

While the tendency to suddenly flip to self-assertiveness might lead some to type me a 5 or even a 6, I would disagree with that classification. I’m not as self assertive as a 5, and I’m not as defensive as a 6. I tend to assert in the interests of peacekeeping. Think “speak soft but carry a big stick” only not in the original poli-sci meaning of the phrase

 

[RadicalDoubt]

Hmm regarding those alternative possibilities, I would say if IEI, SEI and LII are in consideration SLE probably shouldn't be. IEI, SEI and LII all have weak Se in common (LII being Se PoLR, IEI also having 1D Se though duals can often mistype as each other and while SEI has 3D Se, it runs in antithesis to their lead function so Si is always their preferred method of sensing - Se leads would have that in reverse neglecting Si comfort in order to exert their Se pressure). I think either way you value Si/Ne.

Mistyped it, I meant SLI (with the possibility of Se ignoring being what I was focusing on). By video typing especially, I have been consistently typed as ILE as well (and while I typically relate strongly to the position of Si and Fi in descriptions I have read about those placements, I'm not sure how likely that is since, while individual and quirky out of purely not being aware of things, I don't think I'm as overtly contrarian as Ne in first position implies). I've always been under the impression that I likely value Si and Ne, but something about weak Ni doesn't fit either. I wonder how much of this is influenced by being likely neurodivergent in a specifically sensory processing fashion.

Do you have any opinion on my type since I've given a few on yours? In regards to MBTI/Socionics of course, we did have a good discussion about enneagram a while back though. I'm absolutely confident now on valuing Se/Ni but I honestly could see 4 or 5 of those types as fitting, being EIE, LIE, ILI (which I could see in both socionics and their "equivalents" in MBTI) and then in socionics I could also see SLE and SEE tbh (although probably not Ti PoLR, but it's been suggested) - that being said the first 3 are definitely the 3 most likely imo.

To be honest, I have always seen you as having Se in high/prominent position. When you typed as ILI before, I found that really odd and probably incorrect. ILI was suggested for me multiple times, especially when I first got into socionics so I've read about it decently and you really don't seem Fe polR at all. The positioning of Se in that type in particular also seems really off, even with the dominant subtype (I think my initial reaction to interacting with you was SEE, but having met an actual SEE I think that's probably off, specifically looking at where Fi and Fe seem to be positioned. You don't come across Ti polR either I'd probably agree). Reading up on quadra values and such, I think it's very possible that you could be a beta type, most likely EIE or SLE (probably EIE as you seem to relate most to Ni ego descriptions). I can definitely see Si being in a weak/devalued position probably (ie. correct me if I'm wrong, SLE is Si ignoring and EIE is Si polR, correct?). You come across as an extroverted type in socionics at least. if neither of those work, I wouldn't be overtly opposed to LIE. You're most likely the dominant subtype, but you probably already knew that much. To add, I am basing this off both our personal interactions and what I've observed from you both on forums and through video platforms (as I recall looking through your video typing thread back on 16-types back when you and I were both trying to be typed on that platform).

The mbti system has been pissing me off recently so idk how good my input will be here (even though I technically know more about the mbti than socionics). I initially had you pegged as an ESTP, but more realistically I think you have an ENxJ temperament. You tend to type as 385 tritype wise (which I think I agree with so long as it's an 8w7 fix, which I think I've seen you go with before), which tends to be a relatively "dry" (for lack of better words; I mean more in a overtly emotivist sort of way in the sense that it's double competency, you're not boring or librarian in the slightest) and ambiverted, which may be why you've considered intoverted types in the past. I could see either a more disagreeable (in the big 5 sense) ENFJ working or ENTJ. I think I may be partial to ENTJ at this point in time.

 

[miss deceit]

Mistyped it, I meant SLI (with the possibility of Se ignoring being what I was focusing on). By video typing especially, I have been consistently typed as ILE as well (and while I typically relate strongly to the position of Si and Fi in descriptions I have read about those placements, I'm not sure how likely that is since, while individual and quirky out of purely not being aware of things, I don't think I'm as overtly contrarian as Ne in first position implies). I've always been under the impression that I likely value Si and Ne, but something about weak Ni doesn't fit either. I wonder how much of this is influenced by being likely neurodivergent in a specifically sensory processing fashion.


To be honest, I have always seen you as having Se in high/prominent position. When you typed as ILI before, I found that really odd and probably incorrect. ILI was suggested for me multiple times, especially when I first got into socionics so I've read about it decently and you really don't seem Fe polR at all. The positioning of Se in that type in particular also seems really off, even with the dominant subtype (I think my initial reaction to interacting with you was SEE, but having met an actual SEE I think that's probably off, specifically looking at where Fi and Fe seem to be positioned. You don't come across Ti polR either I'd probably agree). Reading up on quadra values and such, I think it's very possible that you could be a beta type, most likely EIE or SLE (probably EIE as you seem to relate most to Ni ego descriptions). I can definitely see Si being in a weak/devalued position probably (ie. correct me if I'm wrong, SLE is Si ignoring and EIE is Si polR, correct?). You come across as an extroverted type in socionics at least. if neither of those work, I wouldn't be overtly opposed to LIE. You're most likely the dominant subtype, but you probably already knew that much. To add, I am basing this off both our personal interactions and what I've observed from you both on forums and through video platforms (as I recall looking through your video typing thread back on 16-types back when you and I were both trying to be typed on that platform).

The mbti system has been pissing me off recently so idk how good my input will be here (even though I technically know more about the mbti than socionics). I initially had you pegged as an ESTP, but more realistically I think you have an ENxJ temperament. You tend to type as 385 tritype wise (which I think I agree with so long as it's an 8w7 fix, which I think I've seen you go with before), which tends to be a relatively "dry" (for lack of better words; I mean more in a overtly emotivist sort of way in the sense that it's double competency, you're not boring or librarian in the slightest) and ambiverted, which may be why you've considered intoverted types in the past. I could see either a more disagreeable (in the big 5 sense) ENFJ working or ENTJ. I think I may be partial to ENTJ at this point in time.

Yeah SLE is Si ignoring and EIE is Si PoLR. The main issue I'd take with both of those typings is honestly the fact that I'm probs not Fe. Like emotional expression is something I really do not react well to. I also definitely agree that the MBTI system is annoying.

As for Se, tbh I was being very dumb when I even added Se lead to that list lol. The clearest indication that my Se is not that strong is that it only ever comes out online (and only ever over text really) - whenever it comes to actually exerting any sort of physical pressure in person or over voice I can't do it. So like, while I see why you interpreted my Se as being in a high position, it really doesn't fit for it to be that way and low position but valued fits better for Se. Gamma NT is probably the best fit for me realistically, especially when it comes to what Fi and Fe actually are and that I was mistaking Fi traits for Fe ironically. The main reason I brought up this for Se and the same applies to extraversion as well is that if you're bad at those things it can be easier to come across as them when you don't have to really do it. I also think forum typings in general should be taken with a pinch of salt because like I don't have the perspective of seeing your whole life and development and vice versa, we really only get snippets and that is being generous.

Those typing videos were something else, and I do actually regret ever posting them. Especially the one on the16types as I find most of the users of that site to be of a lower echelon when it comes to socionics than I am and a good amount of them type based on whether they like you or not rather than any actual logical analysis.

As for my tritype, yeah I type as 358 (in that order). I wouldn't be offended if you called me boring or "librarian" because I think I do get like that at times.

However, if you're interested in discussing this further, I'd rather discuss more of this in DMs than on a public forum in all honesty.

 

[Luminous]

self assertive as a 5,

Regardless of what type you are, assertiveness is not indicative of being a core 5. 5s are withdrawn, withholding, detached, sensitive, isolating, distanced, live in their heads, guarded, move away from others - not toward others in assertiveness.

 

[miss deceit]

Right so this is probably the best thread for me to post this, and I'll keep it short.

From now on, I am not open to typings from others. I do not care if this seems "closed minded", but unless you are on a close 1 on 1 discussion level with me I do not want you to type me.

That is all.

 

[Coriolis]

Regardless of what type you are, assertiveness is not indicative of being a core 5. 5s are withdrawn, withholding, detached, sensitive, isolating, distanced, live in their heads, guarded, move away from others - not toward others in assertiveness.

Assertiveness may not be a hallmark of core 5, but individuals who are core 5 can indeed be assertive. I am one of them. This will come from the influences of our other fixes, our stacking, etc. Why we assert ourselves when it seems contrary to our core type will shed more light on our typing overall.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Regardless of what type you are, assertiveness is not indicative of being a core 5. 5s are withdrawn, withholding, detached, sensitive, isolating, distanced, live in their heads, guarded, move away from others - not toward others in assertiveness.

5 integrates to 8 though.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Assertiveness may not be a hallmark of core 5, but individuals who are core 5 can indeed be assertive. I am one of them. This will come from the influences of our other fixes, our stacking, etc. Why we assert ourselves when it seems contrary to our core type will shed more light on our typing overall.

Plus you're a J, which adds a layer of assertiveness and directness that might not be as obvious in a perceiving 5.

 

[Luminous]

Assertiveness may not be a hallmark of core 5, but individuals who are core 5 can indeed be assertive. I am one of them. This will come from the influences of our other fixes, our stacking, etc. Why we assert ourselves when it seems contrary to our core type will shed more light on our typing overall.

Of course. Just like 9s can also be assertive. 9w1s and 9w8s. Everyone can be assertive. It's just that using a lack of assertiveness as a reason why someone isn't a 5 doesn't follow.

Someone who is 459 tritype - withdrawn, withdrawn, withdrawn - is going to be more withdrawn than someone who is 135 or 358.