Doesn't otroversion encompass three distinct elements, not always co-occurring?

I hope this group still gets some attention, because I’d love to know what others think about my own thoughts about otroversion, which I’ll outline here.

I think there are actually three, possibly independent, things in the experience Dr. Kaminski refers to as otroversion.  One, which he emphasizes constantly, is the experience of independence from groupthink.  The second, which he also emphasizes, is the experience of not needing approval from others.  The third, which he alludes to but does not dwell on, is the experience of alienation from groups by reason of not “getting” the spoken and/or unspoken languages that connect members of a group (which he refers to as lacking the group's "Bluetooth" connection).

Of these three kinds of experience, I have had the first and third, but not the second.  The first kind of experience, being an utterly independent thinker, has contributed to some of my professional successes, but most of those successes came at a personal cost, because I hated having to defend my point of view against mainstream naysayers.  I never felt immune to the reactions of other people.  I always craved approval, and the fact that I could not be silent despite the hostile reactions was a source of pain in my life.  Would I have given up my independent thinking in order to fit in?  No.  Never.  But I hated the psychic pain that it caused me.

The third kind of experience, not grokking people in groups, seems (that is, feels to me) utterly unrelated to the first two, but painfully familiar.  I often find that, when I’m in a group of people, the others in the group seem to have a shared language that’s hidden from me.  I feel like an alien.  This is not always the case, but the exceptions have been rare (and they’ve been gratifying).  When Dr. Kaminski writes about feeling like an eternal outsider, I think this is the experience that underlies it.  It can accompany independence of thought, but it doesn’t have to.  And it's certainly possible to feel this kind of otherness without having a creative, independent thought in your head.  I don’t believe there is any virtue in having this third kind of experience.  I would give almost anything to grok what’s going on for other people when we gather as a group.

I would love to be immune to other people’s opinions, but I’m not.  I would love not to care whether a group welcomes or dismisses me, but I do.  Does this mean I’m not an otrovert?  I think not.  I think Dr. Kaminski did the world a service identifying otroversion as a recognizable "condition" (for lack of a better word), but I’m sorry that he's tried so hard to describe his own unique set of experiences as though they are all essential parts of that condition.

I also want to mention, and emphasize, that I have always considered myself an introvert.  After I learned about otroversion, it occurred to me that my otrovert characteristics (especially the third kind) may be an important reason for my introversion.  I don’t think, however, that because I’m an otrovert, I can’t be an introvert.