What an interesting discussion on the definition of unconditional positive regard. I like what's already been said about seeing the client not as perfect, but as meeting him/her where he/she's at and/or accepting the client with all of his/her imperfections.

The way I think about the unconditional positive regard my T shows me is that T can have a negative feeling about me, but it doesn't touch my core identity. That is, I can annoy T, offend T, frustrate T, but I don't therefore become annoying, offensive, or frustrating. In this way T can be frustrated by a specific action or offended by a specific word, but not frustrated or offended by who I am as a person.

Thus T has unconditional positive regard for ME, but not necessarily for my actions or words.

That makes more sense in my head. In writing it looks like a logical fallacy, (Isn't an annoying person just a person whose actions annoy you? Does it make sense to separate actions from identity?)