The Sakinorva Databank
home index activity
random rules donate

6w5 "The Paranoid Android"

Alternative Enneagram

in Philosophy, Psychology, and Social Sciences

6w5 "The Paranoid Android" ~ Sakinorva Databank

6w5 "The Paranoid Android"


Alternative Enneagram

ei
ns
ft
pj
functionenneavariantsociopsyche
ISTJ 2
6w5 2
cp6w5 1
sp/sx 2
sp/so 1
LII 1
LSI 1
LFEV 1
234 567 891
h
e
x
a
c
o

total votes 24

5

2

3

3

3

2

1

Click to toggle markup guide.

bold**bold**
italic*italic*
hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"[hyperlink to "contextualizing functions"](https://sakinorva.net/library/contextualizing_functions)
(i){https://i.imgur.com/g0oL9CB.png}
You may not modify this entry's picture.

strawberry crisis

enfp

7

2019/01/17 (Thu) 18:07:26

#4668

You’re right, I should layer the votes instead of averaging them. If someone votes from the hard tritype dropdown, they submit that type while sending “null” values to the rest of the types (e.g. 125 -> submits 1 to 1, 2 and 5, but submits nothing to 3, 4, 6, etc). Because of the averaging system currently in place, sixteen hard 125 votes will be countered by someone voting any non-1 number to 1, 2, or 5 while voting 1 for 9, 4, or 6. I’ll see what I can do about it soon.

Editing post #4668 by strawberry crisis

Replying to post #4668 by strawberry crisis

LadyX

intp

5

2019/01/17 (Thu) 06:38:42

#4663

There was one tritype vote for 693

I voted 694

Now it shows 539 (2 votes) - how is this averaging being done??

Editing post #4663 by LadyX

Replying to post #4663 by LadyX

dateusernamevote
20/01/31 22:00tch ISTJ
19/08/14 11:37Tman ISTJ
19/02/02 00:33Taco110 ISTJ
19/01/17 06:36LadyX ISTJ
dateusernamevote
20/01/31 22:00tch ISTJ
19/04/08 11:50tman ISTJ
dateusernamevote
19/04/08 11:51tman 6w5
19/01/17 06:36LadyX cp6w5
dateusernamevote
19/04/08 11:51tman sp/sx
19/01/17 06:36LadyX sp/sx
dateusernamevote
19/08/14 11:37Tman 614
19/01/17 06:37LadyX 694
dateusernamevote
19/04/08 11:50tman LSI
dateusernamevote
19/10/26 01:01Tman LFEV