CT Adult Poll Dance #3 Jim Clark

[Roshan]

Sorry, I forgot. It was far from mainly me. There were two goddam threads, the one I set up went on for TWO MONTHS, plus the one Vincent set up, and then a special three way pm set up with Vincent and Anthony for Amy.

And now this? We're just going to write forever are we?

(posts crossed Vincent)

[Roshan]

I have immortalized this splendor.

I remember thinking he was an Fi user as a first impression, though I think I could have been conflated that for Si ‘warmth’ maybe.

No, i think you're right that he's upper slot Fi (Fi seeking most likely) but this simply was not apparent to me at all. Are you able to articulate how you got this impression so early on, Amy?

To be honest I remember it as more of a brief first physical impression rather than based on anything he said in particular. However, I’m not sure how to articulate it with reasons. I suppose maybe he didn’t seem outwardly responsive enough, or like he was ‘waiting for a green light’ for Fe first. Then once I saw him as ‘competence focused’ (the right way to do things) it was hard to not to see Te over Fe. Basically, instead of consciously thinking of why he was an fi user specifically, I didn’t pick up on anything that said he wasn’t. Which I think had to do with my own tunnel vision typing more than anything.

ORIGINAL To be honest I remember it as more of a brief first physical impression. Rather than based on anything he said in particular, but I’m not sure how to articulate it. I suppose maybe he didn’t seem outwardly responsive enough, or like he was ‘waiting for a green light’ for Fe first. Then once I saw him as ‘competence focused’ (the right way to do things). It was hard to not to Te over Fe. Basically, instead of consciously thinking of why he was an fi user specifically. I instead didn’t pick up on anything that said he wasn’t, even if I wasn’t thinking of reasons at the time for getting that impression in the first place. Which I think had to do with tunnel vision typing more than anything.

I will add this though while considering that the contexts are different. It was hard to see Jim as an extrovert, let alone Fe PoLR specifically in that short clip you posted after the interview. That really shouldn’t be all that surprising to me, as he job literally requires him to be an initiator (and of multiple projects specifically. Which would make sense for Ne agenda). Also, to add that while I could try and find reasons for why he’s Fe PoLR. For example, the main one I saw being his frustration with his boss (in the original interview). Obviously having a legitimately crazy boss doesn’t mean having or lacking Fe. However, it became an issue with hierarchy/ social power (rather than simply an attempt to display force) when the boss asked to resign for what he wrote about his lack of competence. I assumed that because he was still in a secure position in his life at the time of the incident, and that because he was retelling an old story and now more mature. That that explained why he didn’t seem overly frustrated/ out of his element while discussing it. Despite this, nothing really hit me hard as ‘this is definitely his PoLR’. In all fairness, the lack of Ni didn’t really stand out to me either, but that right there probably should’ve been a sign. -The lack of it-. Jim has his reasons for all his decisions and considers the details in his security systems. We don’t really need to talk about ‘the point’ of it all, because Jim never brings it up. ThE machine will carry us all forth to what needs doing.

ORIGINAL I will add though that while the contexts are different. It was hard to see Jim as an extrovert, let alone Fe PoLR specifically in that short clip you posted after the interview. Which really shouldn’t be all that surprising to me, as he job literally requires him to be an initiator (and of multiple projects specifically. Which would make sense for Ne agenda). Also, while I could try and find reasons for why he’s Fe PoLR. The main one being his frustration with his boss (in the original interview). Obviously having a legitimately crazy boss doesn’t mean having or lacking Fe. But it was an issue with hierarchy/ social power (rather than simply an attempt to display force) when the boss asked to resign for what he said about his lack of competence. I assumed because he was still in a secure position in life at the time of the incident, and that because he was telling an old story and was more mature. That that was why he didn’t seem overly frustrated/ out of his element when talking about it. But nothing really hit me hard as ‘this is definitely his PoLR’. In all fairness, the lack of Ni didn’t really stand out to me either, but that right there probably should’ve been a sign. The lack of it. Jim has his reasons for all his decisions and considers the details in security. But we don’t really need to talk about ‘the point’ of it all, because Jim never brings it up. ThE machine will carry us all forth to what needs doing.
1

[Vincent]

I also assumed that my syntax would be understood just because I understood myself,

No you don't Amy.
That's (one of) the issue here, and it always has been the case.

This, and pretty much everything in your last post suggests that you think your thinking itself was fine, that you were trying to make a specific point, that your only error was to assume it was clear and that all this is just about miscommunication.

Except none of this is actually true. You were just rambling without collapsing anything and without saying anything of substance because you felt like it and you felt you were entitled to. Then you kept agreeing with everything you thought i was saying, and didn't even notice the contradiction in your post until i hammered it for you.

For you to be saying that you understood yourself is blatantly delusional and quite frankly insane, especially since those language threads and then the facebook pm were very explicitly set up to help you with your thinking.

And for you to be still saying that now really shows why this is going nowhere, and not even fast, and why it HAS to happen in a video chat instead.

[e-ssam]

9w1 seemed wrong when I voted and I was thinking maybe 9w8 more, but I'm not sure why I thought 9 lead either.

What about the tritype ? Why did you think it was 259 ?

I rewatched the video when I was off the site. I haven't checked the site since I read Vincent's questions but I didn't acknowledge with liking, sorry.
I wanted to post this still though before I catch up.
I don't think 9 lead is "not clear". He's off the cuff giving sagas, not very precise, except with the sequencing with the story, and doesn't really take over space.
He's also pretty much still a farm boy. (Si/9?)

Like Anthony, I ruled out Ti polr fairly quickly because he's a "computer guy" and a very successful pioneer.

But you thought he might be Ti inferior ?

Also, why would being a very successful pioneer be related to Ti ?
It's more Ne/Te related if anything. Start a new company, push it, succeed, repeat. Emphasis more on results (Te) and kickstarting (Ne).
And With that said...
I think 9w8> 9w1. 3 is more clear to me and I should've seen it, don't know about the head fix, 953 as a gestalt didn't fit. Maybe 973?
And SeTi should have a more "conquer" more than just competency, but I don't see that with him.
Nothing made me think either Je could be polr
I still think ST>SF though, and I'm back to Se 6th, Si 2nd with Ne agenda.
So, TeSi then?

[Roshan]

For you to be saying that you understood yourself is blatantly delusional and quite frankly insane, especially since those language threads and then the facebook pm were very explicitly set up to help you with your thinking.

If Amy means she understood the content of her original post about Clark, she did. If she means she understood the later posts, their reason for being and any point they might make, she did not. And I don't have the time or patience to go back and figure this out in light of all the rest and that she just came and went again without saying anything about any video chat.

I really don't. There will be one or there won't be one and that is that.

[Roshan]

This is the post in question. I'm going to address things in it TO Vincent shortly.

I also agree with you that I should have just said that I couldn’t edit my post immediately after liking Robin’s because I wasn’t settled yet.

Well, you should have said something like that IF it was true and IF that was what you were trying to say.

At this point, i'm still not sure that's the case.

The reason for that is that you just did it again.
You said again that the low battery was "legitimate reasons". But you also implied that watching the movie was not. One one hand you're saying "i wanted to do it asap but i couldn't". On the other hand you're saying "i took my time". Yet you still don't acknowledge, resolve nor explain the apparent contradiction between those two things.

So i still don't know what was your point with that post.
And i strongly suspect that you didn't actually have one. It seems to me that you wrote that as if you were thinking out loud for yourself on the thread (an exemplar thread), sequencing things without articulating them, and without an actual idea of what you were trying to say.

And i suspect the reason you did that is because you don't feel you HAD TO have a point and you expect us to fill the blanks and "figure it out" for you instead, for the exact same reason you don't feel you have to write without making sentence fragments, and expect us to do the work of mentally reconstructing your syntax ourselves.

Am i wrong here Amy ?

I gave details on why I wasn’t settled in the original post, but it was information that was never asked for. Which means that, yes, I was just thinking out loud, and I can not give a valid reason for doing that.

I’m sorry I’m repeating myself so much, but I want to understand where the contradictory information is confusing, so I can clarify it.
When I first liked Robin’s response I was in the mood to edit my post _at that time_. However, I couldn’t yet because I was leaving soon (and my phone was about to die anyways). By the time I got home and was settled (and could charge my phone), I _no longer_ felt like editing my post asap. Instead, I watched a movie first.

Basically, I wanted to edit my post asap only when I first saw Robin’s response. After being out for a bit, however, I felt like relaxing at home first _instead_. You’re right though, that sequence of events isn’t necessary, nor is there any point in saying that I changed my mind. It just adds unnecessary confusion for others. I also _assumed_ it would be obvious that I was just saying that I changed my mind, which it wasn’t.

Also, while I did not consciously try to make sentence fragments, doing so anyways showed a reoccurring pattern of carelessness. This, in turn, made it harder for everyone else. I also assumed that my syntax would be understood just because I understood myself, and was therefore not being considerate of others.

I was conscious in checking if my sentences were too long, but not checking for fragments after is inexcusable. I tend to write how I speak in my head naturally (usually I’m ‘rambly’), and edit mostly after. I think that because I’m a fast talker, that I’m prone to underestimating the length of a sentence unless I go back and check. I then overcompensated (again) and failed to actually be thorough or clear in what I was saying.

[Roshan]

I'd said I wasn't going back to check what the comment about Amy 'understanding herself' meant until Amy gave us a time for a video chat. I went back after that didn't happen because Vincent and I discussed what to do now and it came up, so I wanted to clarify that point for him:

"I also assumed that my syntax would be understood just because I understood myself, and was therefore not being considerate of others."

First of all, as I said, it was about syntax. And you, Vincent, appeared to have extrapolated that Amy had made some claims to self-knowledge, in terms of understanding herself, and that that was what was crazy. In fact Amy was just stating a truism, that when she, or anyone, writes, we understand what we're writing regardless of syntax and grammar. That actually was one of the few things that made total sense.

I could go on about what doesn't and why, or about any number of things, and indeed, as you know, Vincent, I considered doing so very seriously. However in the continued absence of any acknowledgement of a video chat, let alone a date for one, I have come to my senses and realize it is not behooven unto me.

[Amy]

I’m sorry for not saying anything earlier, I’ve been feeling anxious, ill prepared, and like I would continue to ‘inevitably self sabotage’ (essentially, I was acting cowardly). On top of that I’m still not sure when I can video chat this week. Most likely either Sunday or Monday, but I don’t want to make any false promises. Not that that’s an excuse for not saying anything, as I could have at least acknowledged the video chat.

This is how I see what happened so far. I understand if this is not worth wasting your time on too:

1. The Jim Clark post.
Yes, I understood what I was saying, but it’s so terribly choppy I don’t know how I missed so much. Robin spent countless hours of her unpaid labour with me trying to prevent something like this from happing. She has every right to be annoyed with my actions. I thought about what I wanted to say without thinking about whether I was making it harder for other people.
(As I understand it) There are standards needed to keep the group functioning smoothly, and I did not meet them. Also, because I never compensated for Robin’s tutoring (on her free time) financially, the only way to ‘give back’ is to be conscientious enough to leave less work for others (including and especially Robin). I therefore ignored the bigger picture.

On a personal note, it can sometimes feel like any wrong decision I make is that much more highlighted. Or that even if things are anywhere from good to just okay for a while, that falling back into a bad habit of mine is seen as proof that I ‘really haven’t changed at all’ (no matter what’s happened or not before). On top of that I think I may also have to work on not taking other people’s feelings towards my behaviour as personal resentment towards me as a person. On the other hand, I also know that this may be paranoid bullshit, and that I am in no position to play victim. I shouldn’t act like what I did was ‘just a mistake’ when it’s happened repeatedly, and repeatedly taken up Robin’s time. Regardless. I still want to say how I’ve felt so that you know where I’m coming from.

2. My (unnecessary) attempt at explaining why I didn’t edit my earlier post as soon as I liked Robin’s post.
I did not have a purpose for adding on the information there that I did. I did not think it was wrong to add that information specifically, but I agree I was being entitled thinking others had to listen to me ‘talk just to talk’.

At one point Vincent points out my lack of clarity - ‘The 1% thing suggests that you couldn't do it earlier but the movie watching suggests that you took your time. So which is it and what did you think you were clarifying here ?’
In retrospect I was not as clear as I thought I was over this needless detail. The way I responded to Vincent was immature and defensive because I actually felt that if I tried to fill in any gaps of information in my storyline that somehow all questions would be answered. This was in fact, ‘delusional’, brought more confusion, and once again put the work on someone else. Or put in other words, ‘There was way too much information (but not quite the relevant ones) in that post, and instead of fixing that you just made it even worse.’.

In reference to what I said: ‘I would have edited it sooner after liking the post, but my phone was at 1% and I was about to leave my friend’s house. (I know no one asked for an explanation, but I’ll add it for clarification).’… After he dropped her off, me and my dad went out for breakfast. When we got home I had a shower, and finally I relaxed for a bit and watched a movie before editing the post.’

What I thought I was getting across was that I wanted to edit my original post soon after I liked Robin’s response but couldn’t _at that time_. Then _only after_ I got home, I no longer felt like editing my post asap. This was a needless detail to begin with, and while I didn’t anticipate it would cause confusion, I see now that I was arrogant for assuming I was being clear. I could have saved a lot of time if I didn’t act so defensively and narrowed in on the question.
What I was also originally trying to ‘clarify’ at the time was just where I was and what I was doing, because I assumed without thinking, that more information wouldn’t be a bad thing. However, I lost the reigns on what was necessary/ helpful information for others. I could have just said I wasn’t settled yet in case someone wondered where I was, so I don’t know why I felt a need to say what I was doing. I could have even left it at, ‘I would have edited it sooner after liking the post, but my phone was at 1% and I was about to leave my friend’s house’, and that probably would’ve been more than enough context. I don’t know why I felt like I had to ‘confess’ that I watched a movie at home before responding when I wasn’t expected to respond asap in the first place. It sounds like ‘overpreparing’ with no real point, or a confusing garble of unfounded defensiveness, but I don’t have a concrete answer at the end.

There was also this, ‘You said again that the low battery was "legitimate reasons". But you also implied that watching the movie was not.’ I don’t know why the hell I brought up legitimate vs illegitimate reasons in the first place. It’s not needed, and it distracting to what’s being asked here. At the time I saw legitimate as being ‘things caused by/ initiated by other people/ things.’ While non legitimate meant ‘things initiated by me/ a decision readily in my control’. This is not just a time waster since no one asked me to justify what I was doing. It is once again ‘delusional’ because I just assumed those ‘meanings’ made sense.

3. Vincent pointed out that I expect others to ‘mentally reconstruct my syntax themselves’, which sums up a lot of my behaviour so far. Of course, I don’t post anything thinking ‘no one will understand me’, but I make too many assumptions mentally about what is actually comprehensible. Robin followed up by pointing out just how big this was because of the hours dedicated to helping me with sentence fragments alone (as I had needlessly mentioned I created them to avoid my ramblings).

‘How 'bout you go back to that sentence structure thread and count the number of posts that are about fragments in whole or not INsignifcant part. Keep a separate tally of the ones that are mostly or completely about fragments. Then count the number of days that all those posts that deal with fragments in at least not INsignificant part span and calculate the number of hours I spent teaching you to stop making fragments every time you chop up your rambling run-ons.’
I think I should do this (unless someone, specifically Robin, disagrees) so that I face all the work Robin put in. That, as well as take up my own time to hopefully be less impulsive in taking others time again instead.

4. I had said this, "I also assumed that my syntax would be understood just because I understood myself, and was therefore not being considerate of others."
To jump down I will say that I agree with Robin here, ‘In fact Amy was just stating a truism, that when she, or anyone, writes,we understand what we ourselves mean. That actually was one of the few things that made total sense.’ With that said, Vincent is not incorrect to point out that my thinking has been wrong, that I've lacked a point, and that this is not just about miscommunication. The rambling lack of substance was indeed entitlement.

[Vincent]

4. I had said this, "I also assumed that my syntax would be understood just because I understood myself, and was therefore not being considerate of others."
To jump down I will say that I agree with Robin here, ‘In fact Amy was just stating a truism, that when she, or anyone, writes,we understand what we ourselves mean. That actually was one of the few things that made total sense.’

I agree with that too. It's really beyond obvious rereading it.
I got so angry at your stubborn non-collapsing that i ended up completely missing the point myself.

And it's still pretty likely to happen again since none of the things you mention as "needless details" in your last post are actually needless nor details (and i suspect that since you used the word "confess" yourself, on some level, you already know that).

So it really really has to be in a video chat. Either Sunday or Monday could work for me but the sooner we know the better since i'll likely have to schedule my work and/or my sleep accordingly.

[Roshan]

I have to see Aviva (therapist) between 1 and 2 on Monday, so I'll be out between 12:30 and 2:30.