based on the movies---can anyone do a writeup? im curious

I'm a rising junior, but with everything I have so far, what would lead you to reject, waitlist or accept me from my college list if you were an AO? What can I work in in the next year to not get rejected? Minus, like, the absence of a junior year transcript (pretend that exists yk).

its ok if im hopeless at the 'dream' schools I have. I kinda know I fucked up my freshman year gpa and id be fine w realistic assessments

College List (Tentative, probably will add more)

(Safeties) University of Houston, University of San Diego, CUNY: Baruch, University of Connecticut

(Target) University of Washington-Seattle

(Reach) UT Austin, UMich, UC Berkeley, Boston University, USC, NYU, UCLA, Cornell, Rice, Northwestern, Duke

(Dreams--I doubt it lol) UPenn, Yale, UChicago, Columbia, Harvard, Stanford

Might ED UChicago/UPenn or REA Harvard/Stanford if im feeling desperate

Demographic.

Location: Medium sized state. Metropolitan area. Not CA/TX/NY lol, but I doubt they would be taking people from my state and especially not my area for regional diversity.

School: Moderately competitive high school; out of 18k+ public schools USNews ranks, its in the top 600.

Personal: Asian-American Male (I know thats so rare!!!), not first gen, no legacy, probably full pay (!!! for nyu lmfao)

Major: Political Science

Stats (yes they are mid to poor):

• GPA: 3.8 UW/4.3 W (or 3.87/4.43W if we take off freshman year for like the UCs); upward trend tho (3.71 freshman year cus I was a bum and didnt try in electives, have been slowly trying to fix it)
• APs: 4 in Grade 10 (Precalc, Seminar, World History, Micro/Macro), 4 in Grade 11 (Lang, Calc AB, US History, Physics 1), probably 3 or 4 more in Grade 12.
• SAT: Haven't taken it yet, will soon but if we go off the mean of my last 3 practice tests we can estimate ~1540

Extracurriculars (Awards)

ill keep these vague to not get doxxed

• Top 40 at Nationals in my Debate event (2x Nationals Qualifier)
• 3rd Place at the State Championship in my Debate event, top placing sophomore (2x State Debate Qualifier)
• #1 Freshman and #1 Sophomore in my state for NSDA points in 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 (this isnt an award from a tournament but its kind of important because national speech & debate association points come from every event combined, so its the only placement thats not just among people from one event among many)
• 2x State Speech Championship Qualifier
• Cleared to elimination rounds at National Circuit Debate tournaments
• Front Page Pick Poem and ~3k reads for that poem at this random poetry website (this is fake)

Extracurriculars (Leadership/Experiences/Projects)

• 1. Congressional Campaign Intern, 1 of 8 paid Democracy Summer Fellows (high schoolers & college students) selected from several hundred applications filed to a U.S. Congressperson's campaign
• 2. School Debate Event Captain, generic but I lowk did a lot.
  • tripled the amount of first-years graduating to varsity by mid-december compared to last year (u have to do well at tournaments to be varsity)
  • tripled attendance at the annual fall scrimmage for ppl in my event
  • organized an unofficial tournament w captains from 4 states over winter break to prepare my freshmen for the January/February topic
  • 1 out of 5 freshmen I taught made it to state and nationals
  • also this means I was board member on a ~100 person club and I also did board member things
• 3. Debate Summer Camp Nonprofit Board Member, board member at a debate summer camp teaching hundreds of kids this summer, guaranteed to be organization president next year. I'm in charge of all debate coaches and curricula & some outreach
  • I wrote the organization's executive board charter myself cus im js like that
• 4. Private Debate Coach, coached 1 kid from may to june '26 and then he got top 3 at middle school nationals his first in-person tournament? im lowk surprised but hey milk milk milk
• 5. School Chapter Secretary for an Organization for Youth in Politics, name will be left vague but through the organization I got to discuss specific bills with some state legislators personally
• 6. Nonprofit State Branch Founder, founder of a state branch of a nonprofit that has some big numbers and big partnerships. I started this like a month ago so hopefully I'll have more impact later.
• 7. Blog, started it w some friends, its lowk satire but we have like 2k reads
• 8. City Youth Council Member, im not gonna lie this is bs and they accept everyone
• 9. City Youth Council Action Committee Officer, elected officer on one of the city youth council action committees dedicated to solve a problem, but im still not gonna lie I got nepo'd in by my friends and didnt do shit

Honors

• National Speech & Debate Association Honor Society Degree of Outstanding Distinction (Top ~1.5% of members wowowow)
• im not even gonna lie my gpa was so shit I didnt make it into NHS LMFAOO nobody is honoring me for shit

Sometimes I just randomly see acceptances from ivies or T20s that just make me very confused.

I think there is like, room for some more optimism here because on this sub I see this conception of the ivies as these Uber-selective institutions who evaluate everything on merit basis and anything but excellence means auto-rejection.

But that seems entirely inconsistent with my observation. Not that excellent people don't end up at these schools, but uhh... there are some headscratchers. Again, not saying bad people have good chances, but sometimes it produces... questionable outcomes.

For example, I knew this one guy - west coast, chinese male, competitive area, with a 3.4 GPA from a grade-inflated school where 25% of the class has 4.0s, like no "cracked" ECs (student council, swim but not a recruit), not underprivileged, not legacy; then got into NYU?

Yes full-pay; but like...it's not just holistic admissions either, because there were people at that school much more "cracked" than him that were rejected. If he did a chance me, I feel like this sub would just laugh at him.

Actually, like about half the people I know that got into ivies+gtown+nyu this year (very specific because I'm thinking about specific people) were these "headscratchers" compared to "cracked kids."

The only unifying character trait among the headscratchers aside from general incompetence wasn't legacy/athletic recruitment/high SAT/ECs/URM but were just that their parents were very rich.

Which yes, wealth correlates to admission generally but it wasn't a building donation and it definitely wasn't being able to buy like SAT prep and EC opportunities since they weren't very stacked in those things. They just had a lot of money. I don't know.

Aiming for T20s. Likely will end up ED'ing UChicago for the 20-30% acceptance rate as a T10, but who knows?

I doubt T10. GPA is lowk too cooked for that and my ECs are okay but not "wow you cured cancer."

This is both a "chance me" post to know if my dreams are out of reach because of stats/get a different read on my app, because I'm feeling very pessimistic like everyone on here, but also an "advice" post to know what to do going forward.

This post is probably annoying and a little bit toxic, but that's what this sub's for...

Demographics

Race/Gender: Asian Male

Financial Status: Income undisclosed but full pay.

Hooks: Not first-gen (both parents have masters), not athlete,

Region: Somewhat competitive West Coast region outside of California. It's like a mini bay area but less cracked. Very asian and wealthy. Public school. ~10-15 of my graduating class of ~350 this year matriculated to ivies.

Additional Context: Moved to this area before my freshman year from a much less competitive area in a different state. Curriculum adjustment was a challenge.

Intended major: Poli Sci or Public Policy.

Academic Stats

GPA: 3.79 UW / 4.0 W*.

Non-standard coursework:

AP Seminar, Precalc, AP World Hist, AP Micro/Macro (Sophomore year)

AP Lang, AP US History, AP Calc AB, AP Physics 1 (Junior year)

*(Specifically, my freshman year GPA was a 3.71, and my sophomore year GPA was a 3.86, an "upward trend" if that helps. The reason my freshman year GPA sucked was because I wasn't locked into college admissions yet and I thought some courses wouldn't be relevant to my life, so I tanked a C in ceramics, B in art & design, B in PE. "When am I ever going to have to do ceramics?" Rookie mistake, I know. I'm told Cali schools discount freshman year in GPA calculation--which I hope is true.

I can get my GPA up to a 3.86 UW/4.19 W if I lock in junior year, or a 3.93/4.43 by Cali school standards. Big "if", but I have to try.)

Standardized Testing: No scores out yet, but I've gotten 99th percentile on most standardized tests I've taken in my life.

Extracurriculars: Awards

Debate:

• Top 35 in the nation at the National Speech and Debate Tournament for my debate event, out of ~300 competitors that qualified to Nationals out of ~10,000 competitors of my event in the country. 2x Nationals Qualifier.
• 3rd Place at the State Championship for my debate event. Highest placing sophomore. 2x State Debate Qualifier.
• 2x State Speech Qualifier in Impromptu Speech.
• Cleared to elimination rounds at TOC-bid, National Circuit tournaments like Berkeley and others.
• #1 member of the Class of 2028 in my state for NSDA Honor Society merit points in both the 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 school years. Significant because the Honor Society is the NSDA's official "ranking" of all students in a state and takes place irrespective of what event you do.
• NSDA Honor Society Degree of Outstanding Distinction (2nd highest degree in the NSDA honor society, with only ~0.8% of 140,000 members having it).

Others:

• Front Page Pick Poem that has accumulated ~3k views for October 2025 at a poetry website. (Yeah, this one is kind of BS).

Yeah, my awards aren't very well-rounded.

Extracurriculars: Experiences

Congressional Intern

• 1 of 8 selected to be a Democracy Summer fellow with my Congressperson. Paid internship with 10-15 hours of in person work canvassing, phone banking, etc combined with academic seminars designed to "train the next generation of democracy."

Debate Captain

• Elected board member on my school's Speech & Debate club with ~100 members.
• Graduated 71% of first-year competitors I taught this year to varsity by January 1st, compared to 29% from last year.
• Increased novice attendance at my school's annual fall scrimmage by 200% compared to last year.
• Over winter break, organized a practice tournament over winter break with schools from 4+ states for first-year debaters.

Debate Summer Camp Director of Debate Events

• On board for an organization that has taught ~300 students over the last few years and received local-level recognition. Oversee curricula, outreach, coach recruiting, etc for all debate events taught at the camp. This year has the most student debate signups in the organization's history.
• Guaranteed President next year due to nepotism, I mean, networking.

State Youth Advocacy Organization Chapter Secretary

• Elected Secretary of my school's chapter of this organization. Did the normal Secretary things.
• Also, through the chapter, participated in discussion over several bills relevant to youth with multiple state legislators.

City Youth Council Member

• Selected as a member of the City Youth Council.
• Officer on a subsidiary organ of that council. Make presentations to apply for city grants, itemizing requests, facilitate meetings, and carry out duties specific to the subsidiary body I will not disclose for privacy.

Private Debate Coach

• Coached 1 student for 1 month this spring. I didn't actually think this would result in something, but somehow I got this kid who has never gone to an in-person tournament before to get top 2 at Middle School Nationals in his event out of ~100 middle school nationals kids.

Newsletter

• Online Substack I started with some friends with over 1800 reads. This one isn't that serious.

This isn't one of those posts about how unlikely it is. More about understanding the process.

In the literature, how does the SEE "get with" the ILI? As in, bring the ILI out of their shell, get the ILI to actually think that there's romantic potential? Am I just supposed to walk up to them and say "hi, I like you"? That seems less nuanced, more boring than I'd expect.

I'm an SEE and I've known my dual for a while. Like most dualities, I didn't think anything of it for like, the first 6 months before I suddenly realized I liked them. Then I asked them if they liked me. They said no, so I let it be. But then we met up in person one more time and I got the very distinct feeling that it was a lot more like a gray area, that we have a shit ton of chemistry and now I'm thinking their first response was more of a cost-benefit analysis of what to say-- because I didn't openly declare and I just asked, there was more to lose. If I were them and liked me, well, I would say that I liked me but also acknowledge that would be rationally dumb.

I'm annoyed. We're very good work partners and I would like the ILI in my life for at least the next year to pursue this joint venture, and I don't want to risk making it "weird" given this in case there isn't anything reciprocal. The first time after I asked them if they liked me I lied my balls off and spun a story about something something plus curiosity. But you don't really come back from an open confession.

Am I just condemned to limbo til we finish the shit we're doing and my hands are freed? How does the ILI's brain work? Can I ever drop enough hints? What the hell does the "victim" romance style's whole thing about "not sure about own interest in another person" mean because if this indicates they just like whoever tries to get them then does that mean I'm green lighted to ask for as much as I want (which doesn't feel right and seems predatory)??

Can someone just translate the fundamental concept of SEE-ILI duality out of 20th century Russian?

Asking because my AP World teacher this year is known as like, a demon. Former college professor that was the kind that would brag about how few people passed their class, and seems to have kept that mentality when teaching high school. Basically nobody I know has an A in their class, out of like, 100 people. I ended with an 89.48%—which is just a B in my school since there’s no + or -.

This concerns me because I want to be a humanities major/polisci. I understand this won’t be the make or break at state level colleges, but I have aspirations to pretty high places. At T10-level rigor, I doubt the B would just get glanced over from the 2nd semester of my sophomore year.

Will getting a 5 on the AP test offset the B? Will it help at all? Do AOs that know a region take into account teachers like this? I feel very frustrated because even though so much was technically based on my agency as a student, the difficulty of obtaining grades in this class feels so outsizedly different than it should be compared to my other classes.

I tried to isolate the ones that probably distinguish him from other people. I think there is a very obvious type that I think he already is and maybe some of these bullet points are written to suggest that, so I would read "between the lines." I also think I may be negatively biased towards him.

I'm so so sorry for this giant text wall

• Alternates between expressions of extreme self-interest ("there isn't anyone in the world that would put me over themselves...everyone will try to gun you down when you're on top...life is a competition...you need to be out for yourself") and deep sentimentality, near-confessions to friends about how much they care about them and meaningfulness.
• Good networker in the sense they can easily make connections with people with "more" than them, can acquire leadership positions, project collaborations, and valuable information before others. Bad in the sense they generally abuse those they consider "below" them or "without," has lost elections for non-appointed leadership positions for this reason, combined with the shortsightedness of not understanding when they would need this contact. Attempts to rebuild relationships in the final weeks after a year of making these connections by his opponent (ESE) did not succeed despite effort.
• Enjoys showing off his connections. Deeply enjoys it when other people discuss his connections or romantic pursuits, even if there is nothing there. When the people curious know the people in question, he will not express this joy openly for fear people will stop discussing his sexual prowess or forward this perceived interest to the girl he is not interested in, but will "fan the flames" by alluding vaguely to developments. Likes to "show, not tell" in this regard, until he openly brags to his friends online who have no contact with the people in question that he "built a harem."
• Can be made to pursue a romantic interest purely by public reactions. Makes an effort to emphasize his friends' and romantic interests' specialness, high achievement, within other social groups. Tries to romance people in high positions in society, prestige is an aphrosdiac for him. However, hates when his "women" do "better" than him.
• Cheats on romantic partners due to mercurialness of own sentiments. Can express romantic interest in another while in a relationship only to severely regret it when he feels sentimental towards his partner again, only for it to change hours later. Hates to be labeled as a "cheater" - does not feel this in his heart. Similarly with lying--lies openly, shamelessly, yet hates to be labeled a "liar" for he doesn't "feel" that he is lying.
• Touchy with members of the own sex. Pushes as far as he believe he can. With a more "submissive" friend, playfully stroked and "pet" them, wraps arms around them. Does not do so with more forceful people. Careful not to be too touchy around members of the opposite sex, should they misinterpret touch as aggression; but once he feels he has permission, he may do as much as he wants.
• Deeply self-aware of his own shortcomings, aggression, violation of others' rights. For this reason is easily able to enter into deep conversations with others about them, can express regret and seem reflective, only to continue to make the same mistakes he logically dissected as leading to negative outcomes. Thus described by peers as a "bad person but not a bad person."
• Competitive. Deeply jealous of others if they do better than him. Can achieve national placement and feel uncontrollable rage towards a friend that placed very slightly higher. Believes they don't "deserve" to. Hides this to their face--claims to them they deserved to do even better, then walks away and tells his other associate they "did not deserve to do as good as they did" in under 30 seconds after making sure they were out of earshot. Can annoy his teammates by complaining about only getting a certain ranking when he did better than all of them.
• Does not have many clothes, primarily for the reason of being too picky when shopping. Enjoys wearing clothes that convey status (suits, polo shirts, etc) but resents modern fashion resembling "comfort clothing" and gender norms which limit the clothes available to males. Understands wearing suits and polos on a daily basis is strange and thus is very picky about photos of himself in civilian dress.
• "Your laziness is not normal peoples' laziness", as said by one of his peers, meaning he was exceptionally hard working. Then, by another when asked to characterize him - "smart but lazy." A third characterization: "quick."
• Finds it hard to work on tasks for long periods of time. When completing work or milestones within work, quickly becomes euphoric with pride with what he has accomplished and needs to "move around" and show others, after which motivation to continue work quickly dwindles. Yet sometimes challenges himself to work for extended periods of time, mustering 8 to 12 hour high-activity work days (i.e. no second unoccupied) once every week or so. Can only maintain these high activity work days with motivational content beforehand, a large dose of self-hatred, vengeance, or impostor syndrome, and no social contact, which immediately breaks his focus.
• This does not apply to competition, during which he can "lock in" for exhausting days at a time. Must see immediate results of his efforts.
• When alone, dances in his bedroom. Claims to have always needed to walk around, pace, throw things in the air, jump around, etc alone close to every day for up to an hour since he was a preteen--but deeply paranoid about others watching him do so, reluctant to sing/dance etc in public.
• Poorly handles sustained stress; a 4 week challenge will look like initial hyperactivity for 4 days (a "starter") and closing hyperactivity for the last week, but idleness in between.
• Readily expresses laughter and happiness. Recently made commotion on an airplane for laughing too loud, the only one of his three companions in conversation. However, can be very quiet in places where he does not know everyone. Eyes move very fast, scanning, jumping around, giving the impression of near-ADHD ness in this regard.
• Does not play sports but characterized as "athletic." Skinny, but described as "jacked." Described also as "spiritually fat" and a "glutton" despite his lack of body fat.
• When introduced to Socionics, showed others. Perceptive and able to type other people without tests, they feel scared at the "scarily accurate horoscope" presented. Quickly changes his mind about what type he is, identifies with 1 or 2 every few weeks and then completely changes. Quick to dismiss Socionics as "bullshit" if his friends read into it too deeply, despite spending hours on it. Has self-typed as every extravert except ESE.
• Moves on fast from adverse outcomes. Deeply stressed out by a challenge until a concrete result is shown. Then, whether it be success or failure, quickly moves on within ~1 to 2 days even if the process of attainment took weeks or months. Applies to romantic interest as well; prone to overanalysis of signs of romantic interest for months when "talking", only to give up all care when rejected.
• Overcaffeinated. Shows up persistently with eye bags, but only pulls all nighters about once per year.

Introduction & Context

Hi---after a lot of time spent around Socionics trying to convince myself I was an Se base I've finally come to the realization I'm an LIE. Something about extraverted dynamic rationals having a hard time typing themselves; but the last five days have made my lack of sensing deeply conscious for me.

I used to love this description of Si ignoring as "oh they don't really take care of their health when they have a goal but when they realize they need to theyre capable of doing it and don't ignore it." Well---it turns out, I'm able to realize when I need to take care of my health, because I'm not stupid and I logically know things like 'sleep affects performance' and 'internal state affects performance' but I'm completely unable to take care of it and somehow I manage to make it worse by trying. This confuses me even more because the things I'm doing to make it better are what you're supposed to do. This is pissing me off a lot and I'm deeply concerned about how this is going to affect my long term trajectory, and I would like to know how to get better at it.

As for typing as an Se base and Si ignoring, I think there is disinformation via this comment I believed that said “When Si vulnerable types are exposed to Si information, they’re uncomfortable and ignore it whereas Si ignoring types will be like ‘why are you telling me something so common sense’” and know they’re ignoring it on purpose? Maybe EIEs will react in the above Si vulnerable described way but I think Si information is also common sense, because I and I expect many LIEs have spent so much time reading into how physiological processes of the body affect things like performance and capacity and health advice for how to live healthily–and we deliberately don’t ignore it when we need to, I think. I just have no fucking clue how to deal with the information, which is the real problem. But under pressure I’m constantly monitoring my internal stasis.

For context, I spent the last few days at this five-day-long national tournament for something blah blah academics. Being twice as long as most tournaments, everyone has always said placing in the top ~10 or so out of 280 is really a "stamina contest" rather than being the most skilled because the real challenge is having the brain power and endurance to last through the week at decent functioning capacity.

So I was like, great! I'll just get good sleep, shower, and eat everyday and I'll win because I'm really good.

I was eliminated on the 3rd day of 5 and placed 34th. But I tied in rounds with a person that's in the top 2 and I was eliminated by someone that placed 4th. Having like, personally went against them and watched them in later rounds I fully believe that my skillset warrants higher placement--and maybe this is cope, but I'm like 99% sure the reason I lost was because I managed to consistently feel like shit every day and my brain became a fucking Nokia brick by day three. Let's like, run through what I was doing...

1. Sleep.

First. Sleep. I had to adjust my timezone by three hours so that was already kind of shit. But obviously it's important, especially in a high-stakes academic competition where you need to know what you're doing. After the first day of competition I took my melatonins... and then managed to insomniac myself awake to 2 am by ruminating about whether or not I was going to fall asleep. So going into day two I had four hours of sleep. Like, conventionally this is bad, and getting more sleep is good, right?

The weirdest fucking thing for me is that after day two, I actually forced myself to get eight hours of sleep. I learned that to get good sleep you should not be thinking about sleeping, and I managed to do that by listening to podcasts until I was really tired and not joining my team's nighttime Mafia game.

Then, when I woke up the next day, my brain and mental performance felt worse and more foggy than when I had gotten four hours of sleep. What the fuck. Then I immediately proceeded to get lasered in the next round and got eliminated.

And I started thinking like, when I get less sleep, my thoughts come out less in fragments and more in full sentences and that makes me a clearer communicator under less sleep. But conventional wisdom says getting 4 hours of sleep every night for a week is a bad idea for performance. But experience tells me getting too much sleep is a good way to get stuck in sleep inertia and speed my thoughts up too fast.

I have zero clue what I'm meant to do anymore in this department. I got 6 hours every day for most of the year and I felt better when I was getting 8 hours daily but apparently I shouldn't when I have stuff to do...?

For someone that managed to convince himself that he has this rare biological genetic temperament that allows a person to only need six hours of sleep and then abode by a schedule with that information being assumed for a whole year, eight hours doesn’t feel like it’s doing me many favors. Same thing–six months ago before a tournament I somehow got myself to wind my sleep schedule back by five hours and sleep at 8 PM every night and wake up at 4 AM, only to be more tired during the tournament itself.

Maybe another problem is that after I wake up, if I haven’t slept the allotted hours I told myself I would sleep that night I will lie in bed until that time has been achieved, which results in me drifting in and out of sleep for that period of time but I can’t bear the idea of starting the day on only a limited number of hours of sleep that would detract from my performance according to science.

Not to mention that it's so fucking hard for me to fall asleep. I would say I have insomnia, because for like a week I had every symptom and I was entirely unable to fall asleep, but it was only for that week and after I lost I slept like a baby for thirteen hours (after which I woke up with a splitting, incredibly painful headache–which sucks!). So I think it was just because I was hyper fixating on sleep because I thought it would affect my performance. Which is painfully ironic.

I'm so confused.

2. Food.

I'm not hungry when I'm competing. I have to force feed myself. Whereas on a normal day I can like, inhale a McDonald's or chick-fil-a meal in under 15 minutes, on day 2 of competition after not eating for ~14 hours I had to sit there and force feed myself a chicken sandwich for 30 minutes nibble by nibble because running off adrenaline I feel zero hunger.

And like, I don’t really like eating generally. When I eat, apparently I either eat too much too fast or nothing at all, which is super annoying because both fullness and hunger kill whatever sense of working momentum I have at a given moment. If I eat too much I always get a stomachache and I get really tired and I can’t continue working and I’m forced into idleness which kills my working pace. If I don’t eat I get hungry and I get low blood sugar after a few hours and I can’t do anything more. I deeply wish I didn’t have to eat, but alas, nutrition is key to avoid debilitating health problems and starvation that would hurt me a dozen times more.

I think this might be because I’m one of those people that just eats all the food in front of me when I’m eating regardless of how much it is. Maybe this is part of my Asian upbringing where you’re told to clear your plate, but if I have a single slice of bread in front of me versus a full large pizza, I just eat until it’s done and then I don’t think to eat any more or less. I have no clue how much I want to eat or more specifically how much is healthy to eat. Sometimes I’ll put together those calorie trackers or adhere to servings and then realize the process of eating makes me want to eat more—or sometimes it’s the opposite where it’s too much for some reason. I don’t know.

I have a habit of just eating fast food at the exact same place with the exact same order every day for months at a time as well, and people tell me I inhale junk food and all my friends are very confused about how I’m 5’9 and 131 pounds. I was called spiritually fat by one of my friends, which is an interesting metaphor.

I would like to figure out how to eat better.

3. Temperature.

I’m really sensitive to temperature and I hate this. If I’m too hot or too cold I get intensely irritable and it’s hard for me to do work. I would love to be able to do manual labor in a field but if it gets too hot I burn out after like 20 minutes. For this reason I don’t and can’t really do sports sports despite having a decent physique and being fast and apparently looking athletic and instead spend all my time in front of a computer doing stupid academic competitions–the closest thing to a cutthroat sports-like competitive environment with teams and all the dressings of medals and brackets and glory.

But when it’s really hot sometimes I become super resilient to temperature, like going on walks in China in 103 degree weather. And I don’t know what the distinction is between these instances.

Summary.

I complained for many paragraphs. If I knew how to manage this information better this would be much more concise, but I guess it’s a testament that I don’t know what’s important and what isn’t that I ranted for so long.

I would like help!

Hi, I think this question might look a little dumb. I'm not necessarily asking about how to type myself as one of either but rather how to recognize their distinct outward presentations.

Two gamma extroverts, with both Ti and Si in either ignoring or PolR slots. One lives, breathes and shits Se or Te and the other tryhards it. Ignoring vs PolR probably look the same on the outside and identifying the tryharded functions have to compensate for individual differences in competence, probably.

SEE has Fe demo but it's unvalued and is used as a tool. LIE has Fe role, which can get very competent and... is also used as a tool. The opposite with Ne.

The introverted functions seem hard to identify since I don't think they present externally as much.

How can I tell the difference?

You don't really have to chance me because I think it's still early for that.

Demographics: Asian Male, Full pay; moderately competitive area (my school matriculates maybe ~5 to ivies every year, not Bay Area crazy but not underprivileged). Medium sized state (not like NY/Cali/Texas--but big enough that my school used to have to fly to our state debate championship; like top 15 populous states) decently wealthy area.

Household Income: ~250k for 3 household members

Intended Major(s): Political Science

ACT/SAT/SAT II: Taking the SAT in November, but I've gotten 99th percentile on most standardized tests I've taken in my life

UW/W GPA and Rank: 3.79 UW/4.02W; no class rank

(I'm aware 3.79 UW GPA is terrible; it's a really sore spot for me and sometimes it keeps me up at night--as a freshman, I wasn't really tuned into college admissions culture and I thought random electives I had to take were useless for my future, so I did things like slack off and get a C in ceramics 1, a B in PE, and a B in art & design 1. And I bet on a vague idea of getting an "upward trend" when it came to college. I know I should've gone for the 4.0.)

Coursework: Precalculus, AP World History, AP Seminar, AP Microeconomics, AP Macroeconomics (no AP test scores released yet)

Next year taking AP Lang, AP Calc AB, AP Physics 1, APUSH

Awards:

Speech and Debate:

• 3rd Place at State Debate Championship in my event
• 2x National Speech and Debate Tournament Qualifier
• Cleared to elim rounds at National Circuit Tournaments like the Cal Invitational @ UC Berkeley
• 2x State Speech Championship Qualifier
• 2x State Debate Championship Qualifier
• NSDA Honor Society Degree of Superior Distinction (Top ~2% by points)
• #1 Sophomore in State for NSDA points in the year 2025-2026
• #1 Freshman in State for NSDA points in the year 2024-2025
• Championed 5 local speech & debate tournaments with ~40 people each in my event (but those are probably too small to put on an app lol)

Writing:

• Front Page Pick Poem on a Poetry Website and I have 4.8k+ reads on poems there in general. I didn't really know about competition opportunities til late this year tho.

I hope to uh, diversify this next year with more writing awards. I agree it is pretty concentrated in S&D, which is probably quite boring. I also want to place at Nationals which is in a week, and maybe get a bid or two to the TOC.

Extracurriculars:

• 1 of 8 fellows selected as a Democracy Summer fellow for my U.S. Representative this summer (basically u do on-the-ground organizing as a campaign intern + an academic track, and u get paid)--I'm very hyped abt this one
• Speech and Debate Club--Debate Captain and Board Member currently running for President of the Club; it has ~100 members but should expand next year, and I've made measurable impact as Captain like:
  • Graduating 71% of first-year competitors to the varsity division of my event, compared to 29% from last year.
  • Organized a novice tournament over winter break with captains from schools in 4 states
  • Increased the size of novice debate squad attendance in my event at the annual fall Novice Scrimmage compared to the previous year by 200%
  • Coaching a freshman to qualify to both state and nationals
• Director of Debate Events & Board Member for a debate summer camp/nonprofit this summer; role includes outreach to students, recruiting and coordinating a team of 9+ coaches across multiple debate events and overseeing curriculum design, stuff like that.
  • The camp has historically taught over 200+ students since its founding in 2023 and been featured in local newspapers.
  • I'm guaranteed President of this nonprofit next summer because of non-family nepotism aka networking
• City Youth Council Member and Outreach Director for one of its Youth Action Teams (the city is medium sized: it has a population between 100-200k)
• School Chapter Secretary for a statewide organization focused around empowering youth in politics that I can't name because it's specific to my state. Role includes managing social media & meeting minutes
  • With the organization, I participated in a Lobby Day at the State Capitol where I discussed specific legislation with state congresspeople
• I started a substack with some friends and it has 1800+ reads somehow lol but this was lowk just for fun--but I'm the like the person in charge of it out of us 5 so maybe I can milk it

Upcoming for next years, I have

• Applied to my state's official legislative youth advisory council (but I'm very uncertain about if I'll get in because my essays were kind of rushed)
• Potentially an internship at my friend's family law firm...
• Maybe a TedX talk?
• Maybe maybe DECA
• I'm very short-sighted and I'm not very sure what else I plan to do aside from what I've said here, but I'm sure I'll scrounge up the opportunities from somewhere

Essays/LORs/Other:

• I don't really have clear essay ideas yet, because I'm a sophomore. But maybe I have some (slightly uncommon but still overall very common) life experiences:
  • My school is in a wealthy area, but I moved there just before the summer of my freshman year from a much, much less wealthy & academically advanced area (though not totally underprivileged)---there were also curriculum mismatches (but mostly in science classes--not sure if this explains my bad GPA cus I haven't gotten a B in any science class--actually it definitely doesn't).
    • I think it was still deeply meaningful for me tho, attending a school with a lot of East Asians (~30-40%) from like, 5%. a lot of people here say they love DEI stuff but I spent a lot of my life in a white suburban republican town where I was literally just seen as an archetype of my race, which pushed me to early rebellion against that "good chinese boy" identity and stuff in middle school that uhh may not have been fully legal that Ive never done in high school--it feels so incredibly different to be seen for personal qualities here, rather than the size of my eyes
    • I ran for class office in my freshman year to try and represent people like me, who didn't come from one of my high school's feeder middle schools--I got the 20 signatures needed to run, but I didn't know anyone and this did not work. But it shows passion even if I didn't get the result I wanted? lmao
  • I was born in the US, spent 3 years of my childhood in China, and came back to the US when I was 4 to begin Pre-K not knowing the language at all. I don't think this is very uncommon for Chinese children but maybe it can be spun to make my attraction to extracurriculars that focus around the expression of the English language that I was so late to learn and characterized so much of my early alienation seem deeply meaningful
  • I spent a lot of time in middle school (cough I love covid--jk) and intermittently in high school on these online government political simulations with my friends from a bunch of places! usually im an administrator/organizer so idk
  • I have lots of passion for politics & history to the point where some people I know close wonder if I have autism (I don't--they uh, checked). I have stacks of presidential biographies, at one point I could name you every president and vice president and what they did and their life stories, I lowk can explain to u the bureaucratic structure of the military and niche things like the rate of promotion of commissioned officers to the next position as the effect of up-and-out systems; obviously this alone won't be shown on the app but like I actually like what I do
  • I also have done too much online reading on pseudoscience psychology in this year (this "socionics" thing) but that might be too embarrassing to mention

---

having written everything down, I feel like an archetypal waitlisted applicant.

thoughts??

thought it'd be fun to share---maybe theres some correlation between systems or wtv

source: traitlabs (ts was 600 questions and set me back $50)

---

Openness to Experience - 60th percentile
Openness to Ideation - 66th Percentile
Openness to Aesthetics - 42th Percentile
Openness to Fantasy - 55th percentile
Openness to Artistic Interests - 36th percentile
Openness to Emotionality - 62nd percentile
Adventurousness - 87th percentile
Openness to Intellectualism - 32nd percentile
Openness to divergent values - 53rd percentile

Conscientiousness - 47th percentile
Industriousness - 79th percentile
Orderliness - 13th percentile
Self-Efficacy - 75th percentile
Regularity - 21st percentile
Dutifulness - 5th percentile
Achievement Striving - 79th percentile
Self-Discipline - 83rd percentile
Cautiousness - 21st percentile

Extraversion - 98th percentile
Assertiveness - 97th percentile
Enthusiasm - 97th percentile
Warmth - 88th percentile
Gregariousness - 92nd percentile
Dominance - 98th percentile
Activity Level - 98th percentile
Excitement Seeking - 98th percentile
Cheerfulness - 80th percentile

Agreeableness - 3rd percentile
Compassion - 23nd percentile
Politeness - 1st percentile
Trust - 72nd percentile
Straightforwardness - 1st percentile
Altruism - 11th percentile
Cooperation - 7th percentile
Modesty - 1st percentile
Sympathy - 10th percentile

Neuroticism - 37th percentile
Volatility - 37th percentile
Withdrawal - 25th percentile
Anxiety - 36th percentile
Anger - 31st percentile
Depression - 64th percentile
Self-Consciousness - 14th percentile
Impulsiveness - 87th percentile
Vulnerability - 16th percentile

It'd be pretty hard to differentiate these two.

I know the conventional logic is to look at weak functions, but SLEs and LSIs have the same superego. I feel as if it would be plausible to confuse the role and PolR function if you're overthinking it. Neither likes to be criticized, both are normative, one's more sensitive than the other. It's a big headache.

I feel the same way about the mobilizing & suggestive. I want to be good at both of them! Which one I can "produce on my own" uh, I have no clue. Typing myself would probably be easier if I were an Ne ego and were able to confidently produce self-assessments about my capabilities in these abstract elements.

Anything's appreciated.

Maybe this is common knowledge, but I figured it out while lying in my bed thinking so I thought it might be interesting to share and maybe ppl can clarify some things.

---

The thesis:

In duality, the partner with a given creative function values the expression of their partner's mobilizing function because though it's weaker, the emphasis placed upon it by the partner cuts down on their dual's use of the unvalued but easily used demonstrative function (also their partner's PolR), shifting them towards their valued creative function.

This process is valuable for the dual because there is a trade-off between the demonstrative and creative due to having opposite extraversion/introversion, similar to the trade-off between the leading and role, but which ends up being highly suppressive of the creative function due to higher dimensionality in the demonstrative function.

This process is also necessary for the health of the duality due to overuse of the demonstrative function corresponding to the highly painful vulnerable function of the other.

---

Anecdote:

I was looking back at conversations I had a while ago with someone who turned out to be my dual, way before I really got into socionics.

I have creative (3D) Ti. They have mobilizing (2D) Ti. A socionics novice (aka, my perception of duality when I first got into socionics a month ago) might look at this and think that this mainly manifests as the Ti creative supplying theories for the Ti mobilizing, which they would value. Maybe, partially correct. But that ignores the two-way nature of duality:

Despite higher dimensionality in my Ti, I had told them one of the things I appreciated the most about them was their skepticism regarding things I said. I described the way I thought as randomly saying things, throwing explanations at the wall and hoping they stuck: and I thought people accepted my explanations too easily because I would just spew some bullshit and kind of just argue them into agreement (half the time, by citing made up or real but pigeonholed authorities, facts, and experience, which I have always been really good at pulling from the internet really fast during an argument). And I said I appreciated their skepticism because it forced me to think through the basic logic of what I was saying.

I was quite surprised from my perspective that they thought my methods were "elegant" and analogous to the scientific method and something about how they would end up repeating my conceptualizations of things weeks later to others. I was also surprised by their conceptualization of themselves as agreeing to things too easily. Because that wasn't how I imagined the emphasis on logic in our dyad worked, and I thought that compared to literally everyone they were one of the least easily convincible people I knew.

When I had first gotten into socionics, I thought our duality was me as an EIE and them as an LSI, because I simply didn't believe my Ti was that good but that it was valued, and this idea I needed them for it. Then I thought I was SEE with Ti PolR and that they were an ILI with Ti demonstrative. It's kind of funny how blind you can be to your own creative function just because the demonstrative trades off with it and is so easy to use.

But nope, I had always used and valued Ti, the classification of information was something I did weirdly often for fun as a kid, used often in my life, made me a nationally ranked competitive debater which I somehow overlooked, and high dimensionality Ti+Te allowed me to learn a lot about socionics and how it works despite only finding out it existed a month ago.

---

Generalizations:

Now that I've verbalized it, it seems pretty obvious to me. But some other examples with non-Ti functions, given the generalization of the thesis:

SEE/ILI and IEE/SLI dualization, where the XEE's overly expressive emotions are quieted down by their partner and they are able to proceed more calmly with valued Fi; and the XLI's tendency towards crafting logical theses is made less frequent and replaced by more practical logic Te;

LSI/EIE and ESI/LIE dualization, where the XSI's proclivity to create comfortable situations is made less frequent by their partner and they are able to freely use force with valued Se; and the XIE's constant creation of alternate possibilities is made more infrequent and are able to focus more on one vision with valued Ni;

ESE/LII and LSE/EII dualization, where the XSE's proclivity to the violent use of self-defensive force is pacified by their dual's lack of pushback and they are able to create pleasant emotions around them with valued Si; and the XII's proclivity to forecasting and existential meaning-reading is quieted down in favor of the exploration of varied possibilities with valued Ne.

et cetera.

Obviously, the demonstrative function would still be expressed from time to time, otherwise it wouldn't be able to cover for the dual's PolR. But the general trend should be one of quieting it down in favor of the creative.

(All of the above examples of all the other dualities should be taken with a hell of a mountain of salt because I made them up while sitting on my bed and are purely based on my half-baked understanding of the functions from like three to four weeks of reading wikisocion.io and reddit posts.

Except for IEE dualization, because I've seen it multiple times. Superego relations might suck based on socionic's highly soviet understanding of Intertype relations as the creation of an economic unit, and I can't really work with IEEs, but they make for pretty close friendships and easy understanding of thoughts and perspectives even if not actions--when every one of your function blocks are the same. I've always thought I tend to keep two close people in my time at a time: an IEE to see how I "really" am normally and for all my depraved and hateful thoughts, and then an IEI to bring out the self I aspire to be. But that could be a whole other post so I'll leave it here.)

---

Other thoughts are always appreciated! Especially since I'm not an expert in this stuff.

Not me-specific. General question regarding the 6th function: descriptions I've read of the mobilizing function describe it as something we really really enjoy using and also think we're much better at than we actually are.

Great to know in theory, but overestimation of the strength of your mobilizing function seems to then make it very easy to mistype as your activator, especially with identical quadra values, even when you consciously take this overestimation into account. Because you can apply the same logic to your (real) base function that you think you're good at to claim it's your overestimated mobilizing and claim your mobilizing is your base.

How can you differentiate the base and mobilizing functions aside from your own subjective interpretation of your proficiency at it?

**my bad for the formatting

I saw two typings of Bill Clinton as an LSI:

1. https://socioniks.net/en/famouspeople/?id=beta
2. another post on this subreddit;

And I was immediately and thoroughly confused. Sure, I get the idea that he's a member of the Beta Quadra, but from that point on it all seems to fall apart. He's an EIE, not an LSI. Here's why.

1. Program Ti

The implications of LSI applied to Clinton of all people boggles me. For example, even the idea that he has 4D Program Ti, described by Stratiyevskaya as

"a world that does not change, relationships that do not change - logically beautiful and coherent, calculated, and well reasoned through...ISTj’s logical program is meant to be an alternative to any sort of destabilization of his environment and surrounding structures...rationality is linked, first of all, to the organization of structural order (the “order of things” within the framework of some real, concretely existing system. Outside of the system the ISTj never examines anything...")

Contrasted with descriptions of him:

"Clinton is a man of vast political skill, but also of deep personal complexity. He has the ability to see both sides of an argument and craft a solution that works for everyone***. That’s a rare gift in politics, but it also sometimes means he struggles to stick to a firm principle."

^("Clinton was) ***^(always looking for a deal)***^(**)^(. He) ***^(thrived on compromise and negotiation)***^(, which is why he was able to achieve some of his greatest political victories—like welfare reform, balancing the budget, and NAFTA. But this need for constant negotiation sometimes led him to) ***^(stand for everything and nothing at the same time)***^(.")

^(* + **: these descriptions also seems antithetical to 1D I4 or "Vulnerable/PolR Ne")

^("Bill Clinton is a smart guy, no doubt about that. But he’s also a slick politician.) ***^(He knows how to tell people what they want to hear)***^(, and that’s why he was able to win so many people over. You’ve got to watch out for that kind of) ***^(smooth talking)***^(.")

^("Clinton had a unique ability to) ***^(transcend traditional political boundaries)***^(. He was able to work with Republicans as easily as he worked with Democrats, and that made him one of the most effective leaders in modern history. His) ^(pragmatism) ^(was both his greatest strength and his) ***^(most controversial trait)***^(.")

Consistency was never Clinton's strong suit, which was why Hillary Clinton (an actual LSI, and his dual) was known to be the aggressive, policy-oriented technocrat that he never was.

2. Ethics

The idea Bill Clinton is 1D Fe and 2D Fi is again boggling to me, especially for a politician whose enormous charm was the subject of much media discussion during the first half of his presidency, and whose charm was noted as the one thing that he was able to fall back on during his political career.

^("Clinton is the) ***^(greatest liar of all time)***^(. His lies are effortless. They roll off his tongue. They are almost innocent, they are so deeply ingrained in his personality. And in his case, this is a man who’s a highly intelligent, highly educated, highly articulate person.) ***^(But his gift, his most defining characteristic, is that he can dissemble)***^(, and you almost forgive him because) ***^(he’s so charming)***^(.")

^("Bill Clinton has the ability to look into the) ^(deepest, most despairing parts of someone’s life) ^(and) ^(make them feel) ^(like) ^(everything’s going to be OK.) ^(He connects) ^(with people on a) ***^(visceral level)***^(.) ^(He made voters believe that he cared) ^(about their problems, and for many of them, he really did.")

^("Bill Clinton is the ultimate political survivor. He could have been brought down by) ***^(scandal after scandal)***^(, but he always managed to) ***^(charm his way out of trouble)***^(. There’s something both awe-inspiring and slightly unnerving about his ability to emerge unscathed from so many political crises.")

^("Clinton was not only a brilliant leader but a great friend. He had a) ^(natural empathy and understanding of people) ^(that made him) ***^(one of the most effective communicators in the world)***^(. What struck me most about him was his) ^(humanity—)***^(he cared deeply about people)***^(, and that made him an extraordinary politician.")

^("Clinton’s) ***^(charm is undeniable)***^(, but it’s) ***^(that same charm that often obscures his darker impulses)***^(. He has an) ***^(incredible ability to connect with people on a personal level)***^(, but he also has a knack for bending the truth to suit his needs. He’s both captivating and frustrating.")

I'm not saying you should trust all of these sources, given they're about a now-notorious public figure, and perhaps you might think a lot of the stuff about his deep caring may be fake, but the ability to come across like this indicates to me obvious 4D Fe, especially under deep scrutiny and personal scandal for years and years and years.

Contrast these descriptions to that of other LSIs, like Vladimir Putin or Joseph Stalin, and what they seem like; it's a world different, because even if they may be somewhat sociable, no one can say that their personal charm was the one asset they retained that was always able to lift them out of political crisis. No; their Se ego often results in the use of force (Stalin's terror, Putin's war of Ukraine) to solve political problems instead. Clinton's style seems more reserved for Fe egoes or maybe E8.

Clinton's incredible ability to affect people, together with deal-making and compromise rather than one decisive objective as his main political strategy, again combined with his ability to inspire people with hope and come back from crisis after crisis (nicknamed "the comeback kid*")

* "Clinton’s most remarkable trait was his resilience. No matter how many times he was knocked down*, whether by political opponents or his own doing,* he found a way to recover*. That made him not just a survivor but also* a master of comebacks*—someone whose ability to rebound defined his presidency."*

when people thought his career was over, to me indicates 4D Fe and Ne.

Notice the above quote doesn't describe brute forcing his way through like Se but rather "finding a way" which is more consistent with descriptions of Ne.

4D Fe+Ne That narrows down to two types: EIE and IEE. From here, you can go either way, but I think EIE is a clean shot.

3. Valued Fe, Valued Ti, PolR Si

One extra comment: Fe seems to be something Clinton is not just good at, but consciously values. He needs to be loved by everyone.

^("Clinton is a paradox. He’s a man of deep intellect but also deep contradictions. He) ***^(wants to be loved by everyone)***^(, but that) ^(desire for approval) ^(has often) ^(led) ***^(him to make decisions that were politically expedient rather than morally sound)***^(. He’s a complex figure, both brilliant and flawed.")

Now. Valued Ti. Clinton may not be L1, but L is not something he disvalues either, which is why Hillary (an LSI) is his dual. Suggestive L is described as enjoying concepts being explained to you (for example, liking Science podcasts as a child), which is exactly what quotes describing him reflect:

^("What impressed me most about Bill Clinton was his) ***^(curiosity)***^(. He) ***^(wasn’t satisfied with surface-level answers)***^(. Whether it was about technology, education, or global health, he) ***^(always wanted to understand the issue thoroughly)***^(. He’s a big thinker, and that’s why he’s been so successful in public life.")

^("Bill Clinton is endlessly curious about people and places. He has) ***^(an insatiable appetite for learning and understanding)***^(, which makes him) ***^(a deeply engaging and insightful leader)***^(. He’s someone who, when he enters a room, people just naturally gravitate towards. It’s not just because he’s a politician—it’s because) ^(he’s genuinely interested) ^(in everyone’s story.")

^("Bill Clinton was) ***^(a policy wonk at heart)***^(. He could dig deep into the weeds on issues and come up with solutions that made sense. He) ***^(never shied away from the details)***^(, which is something that set him apart from many other politicians. He actually) ***^(liked solving problems, even the tough ones.)***^(")

Interestingly, these comments seem to indicate his immense value for problem-solving rather than his actual proficiency for it. They laud his appetite for learning, his desire to understand thoroughly, and his enjoyment of problem-solving, but the only mention for the product of these efforts was "solutions that made sense." Which sounds like valued suggestive L. Clinton was, however, definitely not defined by consistent ideology or the creation of a masterful policy plan. That was always more Hillary's role.

Finally, Si PolR.

....Clinton's sleep schedule is actually fucking terrifying. You can look at his Presidential Daily Diaries and see his schedule.

^("Clinton was renowned for) ^(sleeping only five or six hours a night) ^(throughout his presidency. It's apparently a habit he developed quite early...a professor at Georgetown told him great men require less sleep.")

^(Let’s take Bill Clinton for instance. Throughout his two terms in Office, Bill Clinton was well-known for his restless intelligence,) ^(late-night conversational manias,) ^(and) ***^(blatant disregard for other people’s normal patterns of waking and sleeping)***^(. He was, by his own admission, a) ***^(functional insomniac)***^(.)

This was not, however, due to overvalued Te. He often just didn't sleep because he felt like it and wanted to play cards (campaign staff describe him playing cards from three til six in the morning).

He literally couldn't rest.

^("Judy Gaddy, who worked with him in the governor’s office, recalled: “One time he was having terrible allergies, and) ***^(we were trying to get him to rest, and he wouldn’t rest)***^(.)^(” Gaddy put her foot down: “I want you to stay at the mansion. You can’t come here. We don’t want you here,” she insisted. “Well, he came here fifteen times, and I said, ‘Governor, get back in your house.’” Meekly, Clinton obeyed. The problem was that) ***^(even when his body was at rest, his mind was still in motion)***^(. Although he was banished from the office,) ^(Clinton generated scores of new ideas, which he then wanted to implement immediately. Gaddy learned that “the bad part about giving him free time is that he just sits there and dreams up other things.”) ^(The recovering Clinton called her dozens of times) ^(with new ideas.) ^(Gaddy finally gave up and brought him back to work)^(, realizing that “we need to keep this boy busy, because if we don’t, he’s going to drive us all crazy.")

This isn't something he voluntarily chooses to do and modulates well, like ignoring Si. This is an ACTIVE WEAKNESS he ACKNOWLEDGES but can't push past.

^("Clinton) ^(himself has) ***^(long recognized the problem posed by his exhaustion)***^(. The root problem is that) ***^(he cannot tolerate the solution: rest)***^(. One day during the 1992 campaign,) ^(Clinton told Begala, “‘Every important mistake I’ve made in my life I made when I was tired. You guys got to give me a break.’”) ^(Begala agreed, and built some free time into his schedule:) ^(“So then we’d give him a down day, and you know what he would say? ‘Why aren’t we out there? That Ross Perot is in three different states today. George Bush is out shaking a thousand hands! I can’t tolerate it!’”)

^(Even though) ^(intellectually) ^(Clinton understood that his relentless pace was deleterious and wanted to modulate it, he couldn’t.)

^(Indeed,) ^(Clinton requires someone to force him to get rest.) ^(Leon) ^(Panetta, who took over as chief of staff in the summer of 1994, feels that one of the most important interventions that he made was) ***^(scheduling a two-hour blackout period in the afternoon when Clinton could have no meetings)***^(. Panetta didn’t ask Clinton’s permission to do this; he) ^(imposed the ban on him—which was exactly what Clinton required, because he cannot impose such limits on himself.")

In summary:

With Si in the mental ring as a known personal weakness, characterized by an inability to rest that hinders ability to take Se actions consistent with S4, with an interest in policymaking but lack of ideological consistency consistent with L5, valued and extremely proficient Emotions consistent with E1, an uncanny ability to find a way out of any crisis and inspire people consistent with I8, LSI makes no sense and Clinton is probably an EIE.

I feel like ESE/EIE/SEE/IEE or the 4D Fe types are much better fit for that.

I think SLEs would likely be more socially awkward due to 2D Fe and bad selectivity of own relationships (Vulnerable Fi)---they can want to be well liked and climb up the "hierarchy" but end up around "outcasts" because they smiled at them and were friendly.

There's "cool jock that plays by their own rules" but they have highly valued Fe mobilizing so they probably are still dependent on others. EIE would be better at acting like the trope and SEE probably is the reason why the trope is associated with high school popularity. I still think doing what you want without coming across as antisocial requires a lot of Fe slickness that takes a while for the SLE to develop.

They wouldn't be totally socially inept and maybe good at a distance or bossing people around but I feel like they wouldn't be very smooth either, not as much as they want to be. Something about Napoleon being an outcast in military school and being bullied a lot for being stiff and egotistical.

The Vulnerable Fi compensating with Creative Ti combo tends to look like autism as well I think when it gets talked about. It isn't just ILEs. Relationship rationalizing. And Ti creative+Te demonstrative---they can have lots of nerd hobbies.