Why so dead?

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Creepy-female]

[Banana Pancakes]

So you're the only one I know who thinks I'm a Fi valuer. Even Vero and Khola realize I'm a Fi PoLR.
Then, motivationally, Alphas get very well along with Betas. This time I warn you that "motivationally" restricts the meaning of the phrase, ok?
IMO, you are boring and faded for ILEs and SLEs alike. Just a subjective but sincere impression.

I'd like everyone to read over what I said and pinocchio's translation here. It's a prime example of his idiotic re-interpretation.

Nowhere did I say you either were or were not Fi valuing. Not once. You could be alpha, you could be beta, you could be zeta, I don't care.

As long as our community's consensus is that I'm an ILE and your question asked Alpha about their non-involvement, you called for my opinion implicitly.
If you really want to get rig of my annoying opinions you'll have the hard task to change the consensus, but as long as this will obviously would attract an undesirable opposition, you won't do it.

Hold up, you're saying there's a community consensus you're ILE? We're going by consensus now? There sure as hell is a consensus I'm ILE, in fact I started a thread and no one made any arguments against ILE.

Again, in big letters
I'M NOT TRYING TO RE-TYPE YOU. YOU'RE THE ONE WHO INSISTS ON TRYING TO RE-TYPE ME.

Let me remind you that this is a Socionics forum and your only right to claim Alpha membership is based on your real personality type, therefore independent on your (or anyone's) own will. It is not up to you to claim property here.
I don't give a shit if you like it or not, I'm justified to challenge your type at any moment as long as I have logical justifications.

I'm not "willing myself" to be alpha. It's simply the best fit. If you would like to convince me otherwise, please, make a logical case with evidence. YOU are the one making a claim against consensus (consensus being that I'm ILE), so it is YOUR JOB TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE, NOT MINE.

I've explain with other occasion why you are not an ILE. And:
1. You have no evidence of being ILE - provided by you, or someone else. If I'm wrong, you're free to prove otherwise.
2. As long as my (and others', if any) previous claims were not solved, you may not be de facto an ILE - but rather the other way around - therefore I have the right to debate your Socionics-related opinions in every thread.

Okay so let me see here. I claim pinocchio is, I dunno, IEI. Since this previous claim isn't solved, pinocchio is not de facto an ILE, and I get to derail threads. It's your own logic, there you have it.

I already explained you that I don't give a shit about your biased view on me, and that you are the one who's off-topic, shamelessly defying Socionics rules and our respect.
Your lack of respect towards everyone interested in Socionics is also proved by your opinionated stance combined with a shallow knowledge and trivial posts. [I apologize the others for any, unintended, collateral damage]

And yet you continue to bring it up. How about you stop interacting with me?

I agree with many of the Alpha people types on the forum, your remark - that I said all Aphas users are mistyped - prove your hypocrisy once again.

The only "alpha" I DON'T agree with is you. By your logic, since you disagree with more alphas than I do, you're the one who's not alpha.

Any more logical fallacies you'd like to present in lieu of actual evidence as to my type?

[Creepy-female]

Carla. Paul David Hewson says he'd like more chipotle in his salsa, STAT.

[Khola aka Bee]

Carla. Paul David Hewson says he'd like more chipotle in his salsa, STAT.

That's hot

[Creepy-Pied Piper]

Removed at User Request

[Banana Pancakes]

But your claims were based on it:



My opinion in this Alpha thread is based on it as well.

1. You asked Alphas opinions why they are not active.
2. I am Alpha.
3. You have nothing against the fact that I'm Alpha. (Or do you? This is the mystery)
---
Result: it was perfectly correct to say my opinion in this thread.

Everything else in post #18 were only intended to support this opinion, not to type you in this thread.

My mistake, from now on I'll preface all threads as "to all self typed alphas EXCEPT EPHEREMOS" so you won't have to answer.

I made that comment about your type in retaliation to your previous comment about my type (as well as my obvious identical, vero the ILE, and obvious dual, bee the SEI, as they will confirm).

I have no problem with your self typing as ILE. You can continue to type yourself ILE as much as you want. If you continue to comment about my type, I will comment just as much about yours in return, however. I'm not someone you can steamroll with your supposed flawless understanding of socionics.

All I'm looking for here is you to shut your yappy little mouth about my type unless you're going to make a formal case in a separate thread.

[Banana Pancakes]

Hey incognito!
I was in need for a confirmation that many of BP's remarks are of a Se-Creative nature. Thanks for confirming me this hypothesis .

Examples:
- "you to shut your yappy little mouth"
- "is childish and asinine"
- "yapping like a little dog "you're not ILE ruff ruff ruff""
This is a form of minimization they have in mind - but don't use it necessarily in language - about people without authority or power over them, but who opposes them. It comes from the subconscious and they can't avoid it. Allie was using this same kind of remarks to a large extent.

PS: I have nothing personal against you guys. You actually fascinate me.

Yes, this is Se, but this mode is not natural for me.

Again, put all your arguments in a separate thread with your selected type(s) and I'll consider them. I'd love to hear it. For now I'm putting you back on ignore because I'm doing the same thing you do: wrecking threads.