I think the cognitive function model is fine and useful, which is why Dr. John Beebe's model is so appealing.
My main issue with Meyers-Briggs is the use of a questionnaire to type people - I'm an ESFP, but every time I've taken an MBTI test I've gotten back INTJ or ISTP. I never felt that either of those were completely accurate, or that I was an introvert. It's far, far more accurate to type people based on their preferred styles of interaction and thinking (e.g., as an ESFP I have an informative, initiating, movement-based interaction style and I think in concrete, pragmatic, interest-based terms).
Meyers-Briggs is absolute trash and should not be used by companies for anything. Big 5 is also almost completely worthless beyond vaguely describing a person's general tendencies.
The only system that seems to have any sort of validity and real-world use is Dr. John Beebe's Eight-Function Model.
> The problem with all-chat in League of Legends, particularly in the ranked queue, is that it can only hurt your team's chances to win. At best, you're wasting time typing; at worst, you're actively frustrating and distracting yourself from what is already a very difficult game.
I don't agree; /all is a very viable vector for giving your team a huge leg up. If you are skilled at talking shit, you can usually tilt someone on the other team so much that they become a non-factor. So many times I've seen the enemy team turn on each-other because one of their laners made some small mistake, which I capitalized on as a chance to relentlessly attack them in /all chat. They become tilted and start playing poorly, their team starts attacking them as well for the poor play, and often they will either troll, constantly call for a surrender, or even AFK in the fountain. The mental aspect of the game is just another tool in your arsenal for gaining an advantage over the enemy, and in my opinion it's just as important as the mechanical and strategic aspects.
My main issue with Meyers-Briggs is the use of a questionnaire to type people - I'm an ESFP, but every time I've taken an MBTI test I've gotten back INTJ or ISTP. I never felt that either of those were completely accurate, or that I was an introvert. It's far, far more accurate to type people based on their preferred styles of interaction and thinking (e.g., as an ESFP I have an informative, initiating, movement-based interaction style and I think in concrete, pragmatic, interest-based terms).