It happened again

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Alicia Sautereau wrote:

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

speaking of that..has anyone seen or heard from Chris?i don't think i have seen him pop up in the group in a long long time..that or any forums..

i hope he is doing well..and wish the same for all..

---

I haven't seen him in ages, and share your wishes.

---

Same here...how about Trout?

---

Went swimming, late 2010

 

Remember some names, but to many new ones i`ve never heard of since the group was founded

---

Don't  you have another post to answer? Hmmmm... :matte-motes-wink:

---

I arrived at the FC Hangout in May of 2010, and had probably drifted on within a year and a half. I don't recall either of you there. Pity, I'd have enjoyed poisoning you both with my bar snacks.

[Dresden Ceriano]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

[Aethelwine]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Actually Perrie, after the first couple messages, it did turn polite and civil.

 

But I didn't want this thread to be about anyone specific anyway, and I didn't want it to be about what was specifically said, either.

---

If your original post had been about a hypothetical situation and not a specific one along with negative judgments, your intent expressed later might be a little more believable.

[Aethelwine]

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

[Czari Zenovka]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Alicia Sautereau wrote:

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

---

Ceka Cianci wrote:

speaking of that..has anyone seen or heard from Chris?i don't think i have seen him pop up in the group in a long long time..that or any forums..

i hope he is doing well..and wish the same for all..

---

I haven't seen him in ages, and share your wishes.

---

Same here...how about Trout?

---

Went swimming, late 2010

 

Remember some names, but to many new ones i`ve never heard of since the group was founded

---

Don't  you have another post to answer? Hmmmm... :matte-motes-wink:

---

I arrived at the FC Hangout in May of 2010, and had probably drifted on within a year and a half. I don't recall either of you there. Pity, I'd have enjoyed poisoning you both with my bar snacks.

---

That could be why we missed each other at the FC.  I was there in 2007 and maybe once or twice in 2008.

[Awe Thor]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

What sort of nonsense is that? I can't see that you mean physically healthy, so you must be disparaging Dresden's mental health, in which case perhaps you would like to reference the relevant element of the DSM (either 4 or 5 would do) that supports your contention, since one narrow-minded person's opinion is all that it is.

I entirely agree with Dresden; the Forums are a wonderful place to see morons demonstrate their idiocy, to see masochists complain about how badly they have been beaten up, to see naive serial romantics whinge about the ephemeral nature of their partners' affections, and especially to see those, like you, who would like to believe in the the underlying humanity of humanity, but are confronted here by the greater mass of humanity who enjoy nothing more than to hear the plaintive adult versions of the immature "It's not fair!". I note that - entirely appropriately it appears - you even have "whine" as part of your name.

Awe . . . suggests you start a thread called "Healthy Pleasures" and see what responses that get s you.

[Suspiria Finucane]

---

Malanya wrote:

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

 

But how crazy are people that they have to actually take the time to look someone up in-world, and go on a rant in IMs over a forum post?

---

Actually, it's not crazy at all according to the

community guidelines

...

Interpersonal Disputes or Personal Negative Commentary

: If you have a personal disagreement, do not post about it on the Second Life community pages. Residents who have personal differences have other channels of communication available to them —

private messaging in the forums, IM within Second Life, or chatting within Second Life.

Then again, some people never read the CG or TOS.

---

I have read the TOS and CS and completely understand it. Interpersonal Disputes, covers Residents that are acquainted with each other as well as Residents who have had an encounter, an Issue with a merchant I could go on and on. Community Pages = Feeds too. I am sure you know how much "drama" and mud slinging can happened between people that were friends, partners, etc. If you had a disagreement with your landlord, YES IM in world, or a friend you have a dispute with or a merchant. WHY is there a PM option in the forum? It is for just that, if you have a personal dispute PM them, not stalk them in world or,as many do, use the community pages, the feeds to harass people.

---

 

You are arguing semantics dependent on which dictionary a person uses.

 

It clearly shows 3 options to resolve issues. It's a personal preference as to which one for which type.

 

[Suspiria Finucane]

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

---

Malanya wrote:

 

Just like they say... what happens in the forums ..

should

stay in the forums..

---

Exactly!

---

 But in most cases it doesn't and that doesn't bother me at all. A large portion of my closest friends in SL came from the forums. If I would have left them there, what a loss.

 

---

Czari Zenovka wrote:

Years ago a number of SL forumites from "the old forums" created an inworld group called "The Forum Cartel" - that included both the group as well as an inworld hangout of sorts (open to all) that still exists.  The cardinal rule was that any "forum fights" or people who didn't get along on the forums had to drop it at the Cartel inworld.  It was interesting to see fierce "forum foes" having a pleasant chat at the Cartel location.

---

I've been a member for some years now and Chris did an excellent job.  I would even go so far to say that the group healed a lot of forum wounds and the bitterest of forum enemies became friends. The oldbies of the forum know how Chris and I were in the beginning. We became friends through the group.

I can also say from experience that Ima and I set aside our forum differences :matte-motes-big-grin: in-world via IM and no one ever thought that would happen. Once again it comes down to a personal preference as with most things in SL.

 

[Awe Thor]

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

 

You are arguing semantics dependent on which dictionary a person uses.

 

---

Some of us know English well enough not to require a dictionary.

Awe . . . nor a thesaurus, nor a translator, nor a spell/grammar-checker.

[Tex Monday]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

[Malanya]

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

Malanya wrote:

---

Suspiria Finucane wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

 

But how crazy are people that they have to actually take the time to look someone up in-world, and go on a rant in IMs over a forum post?

---

Actually, it's not crazy at all according to the

community guidelines

...

Interpersonal Disputes or Personal Negative Commentary

: If you have a personal disagreement, do not post about it on the Second Life community pages. Residents who have personal differences have other channels of communication available to them —

private messaging in the forums, IM within Second Life, or chatting within Second Life.

Then again, some people never read the CG or TOS.

---

I have read the TOS and CS and completely understand it. Interpersonal Disputes, covers Residents that are acquainted with each other as well as Residents who have had an encounter, an Issue with a merchant I could go on and on. Community Pages = Feeds too. I am sure you know how much "drama" and mud slinging can happened between people that were friends, partners, etc. If you had a disagreement with your landlord, YES IM in world, or a friend you have a dispute with or a merchant. WHY is there a PM option in the forum? It is for just that, if you have a personal dispute PM them, not stalk them in world or,as many do, use the community pages, the feeds to harass people.

---

 

You are arguing semantics dependent on which dictionary a person uses.

 

It clearly shows 3 options to resolve issues. It's a personal preference as to which one for which type.

 

---

I said that community pages are not just limited to the forum. I am not going to type the different forms of contact showing with the examples I used as you can see I have already done that it. There is a PM option and the ability to block a PM from a user in the forum. I don't think there many different reasons for those options being available here. It makes sense. Everyone reads text differently, I believe that's been well known to mankind for thousands of years.

The method of which a person chooses I have already answered in another post of being personal choice. It seems odd that are repeating what I have already answered, have you not read the whole thread?

p.s. I am not arguing. Having an opinion is not an argument, I believe it's a discussion.

edit- in regards to you quoting my phrase to Czari, I make friends with people while in the forum and then take it in world. It's my personal preference. We all have our own choices here in sl and just because someones belief does not go along with anothers clearly doesn't make either wrong = personal choice.

[Paul Hexem]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Actually Perrie, after the first couple messages, it did turn polite and civil.

 

But I didn't want this thread to be about anyone specific anyway, and I didn't want it to be about what was specifically said, either.

---

If your original post had been about a hypothetical situation and not a specific one along with negative judgments, your intent expressed later might be a little more believable.

---

My original post had no specifics. I didn't name any names, I didn't repeat what was said. My post said that someone approached me in world, and expressed negativity about a different post. Then it asked why that sort of thing happens in SL, while making it clear that I didn't think highly of doing so. Go back and read it if you need to.

It only became specific when said person came in here and made it specific. That's entirely on them, and out of my control.

So I'll say it again. My intent had been to talk about the validity of carrying the general discussion forums over into the grid. The topic of "what happens on the forums, stays on the forums". Nothing more.

[Aethelwine]

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Actually Perrie, after the first couple messages, it did turn polite and civil.

 

But I didn't want this thread to be about anyone specific anyway, and I didn't want it to be about what was specifically said, either.

---

If your original post had been about a hypothetical situation and not a specific one along with negative judgments, your intent expressed later might be a little more believable.

---

My original post had no specifics. I didn't name any names, I didn't repeat what was said. My post said that someone approached me in world, and expressed negativity about a different post. Then it asked why that sort of thing happens in SL, while making it clear that I didn't think highly of doing so. Go back and read it if you need to.

It only became specific when said person came in here and made it specific. That's entirely on them, and out of my control.

So I'll say it again. My intent had been to talk about the validity of carrying the general discussion forums over into the grid. The topic of "what happens on the forums, stays on the forums". Nothing more.

---

You original post may not have been detailed but it most definitely was specific, you admit that yourself in your denial, you then included the leading and insulting question

"But how crazy are people that they have to actually take the time to look someone up in-world, and go on a rant in IMs over a forum post?"

Your original post is a huge fail if you really did want to have a general discussion about what the etiquette is for people responding to a forum post with an instant message. You could have just asked the question in a neutral way without any specifics. Like "what is the etiquette is for people responding to a forum post with an instant message where they felt offence? would a private message be better?"

On the other hand if you wanted to further upset someone you know has already taken offence at your conduct. Then I tip my hat to you. Well done you couldn't really have framed the Op or thread any better, within the rules the forum allows.

Assuming you do want an answer to your question, then here is mine... It is far worse to take an event from in world and bring it to a public forum where it might be construed the purpose is for amusement from their humiliation and to massage your ego publically, than it is to raise an objection in response to something said on the forum in private, in world to someone you think might listen and empathise.

[Aethelwine]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

What sort of nonsense is that? I can't see that you mean

physically

healthy, so you must be disparaging Dresden's

mental

health, in which case perhaps you would like to reference the relevant element of the DSM (either 4 or 5 would do) that supports your contention, since one narrow-minded person's opinion is all that it is.

I entirely agree with Dresden; the Forums are a wonderful place to see morons demonstrate their idiocy, to see masochists complain about how badly they have been beaten up, to see naive serial romantics whinge about the ephemeral nature of their partners' affections, and especially to see those, like you, who would like to believe in the the underlying humanity of humanity, but are confronted here by the greater mass of humanity who enjoy nothing more than to hear the plaintive adult versions of the immature "It's not fair!". I note that - entirely appropriately it appears - you even have "whine" as part of your name.

Awe . . . suggests you start a thread called "Healthy Pleasures" and see what responses

that

get s you.

---

Are you intending to inject some humour in to the debate by making me laugh at your apparent lack of basic comprehension skills and bizarre logic?

Well no laughs from me I am afraid i feel sorry for you and your delicate sensibilities... Awe Diddums...

Maybe you should ask your mummy for help with understanding what has been said before sharing.

[Malanya]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

What sort of nonsense is that? I can't see that you mean

physically

healthy, so you must be disparaging Dresden's

mental

health, in which case perhaps you would like to reference the relevant element of the DSM (either 4 or 5 would do) that supports your contention, since one narrow-minded person's opinion is all that it is.

I entirely agree with Dresden; the Forums are a wonderful place to see morons demonstrate their idiocy, to see masochists complain about how badly they have been beaten up, to see naive serial romantics whinge about the ephemeral nature of their partners' affections, and especially to see those, like you, who would like to believe in the the underlying humanity of humanity, but are confronted here by the greater mass of humanity who enjoy nothing more than to hear the plaintive adult versions of the immature "It's not fair!". I note that - entirely appropriately it appears - you even have "whine" as part of your name.

Awe . . . suggests you start a thread called "Healthy Pleasures" and see what responses

that

get s you.

---

Are you intending to inject some humour in to the debate by making me laugh at your apparent lack of basic comprehension skills and bizarre logic?

Well no laughs from me I am afraid i feel sorry for you and your delicate sensibilities... Awe Diddums...

Maybe you should ask your mummy for help with understanding what has been said before sharing.

---

Sorry Aethelwine,   I thought you replied to me, I apologize. I am on my phone and it appeared  as it scrolled you posted to me. Very sorry.

[Awe Thor]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

What sort of nonsense is that? I can't see that you mean

physically

healthy, so you must be disparaging Dresden's

mental

health, in which case perhaps you would like to reference the relevant element of the DSM (either 4 or 5 would do) that supports your contention, since one narrow-minded person's opinion is all that it is.

I entirely agree with Dresden; the Forums are a wonderful place to see morons demonstrate their idiocy, to see masochists complain about how badly they have been beaten up, to see naive serial romantics whinge about the ephemeral nature of their partners' affections, and especially to see those, like you, who would like to believe in the the underlying humanity of humanity, but are confronted here by the greater mass of humanity who enjoy nothing more than to hear the plaintive adult versions of the immature "It's not fair!". I note that - entirely appropriately it appears - you even have "whine" as part of your name.

Awe . . . suggests you start a thread called "Healthy Pleasures" and see what responses

that

get s you.

---

Are you intending to inject some humour in to the debate by making me laugh at your apparent lack of basic comprehension skills and bizarre logic?

Well no laughs from me I am afraid i feel sorry for you and your delicate sensibilities... Awe Diddums...

Maybe you should ask your mummy for help with understanding what has been said before sharing.

---

A lack of comprehension? I was basing my comments on a professional study recently published in the British Journal of Developmental Psychology, which found that  children as young as four had a righteous sense of schadenfreude, which had developed considerably by the time they were eight years old. Unless you have reasons for suggesting that this is only a pre-adolescent phenomenon - and I have considerable practical evidence to confirm it is not - then I would suggest that it is you who is suffering from a lack of comprehension and logic.

Awe . . . I am afraid that the laugh is on you; I am enjoying your publicly humiliating verbal pratfall.

ETA Particularly since you have demonstrated a considerable degree of moral insensitivity regarding maternal support.

[Aethelwine]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

What sort of nonsense is that? I can't see that you mean

physically

healthy, so you must be disparaging Dresden's

mental

health, in which case perhaps you would like to reference the relevant element of the DSM (either 4 or 5 would do) that supports your contention, since one narrow-minded person's opinion is all that it is.

I entirely agree with Dresden; the Forums are a wonderful place to see morons demonstrate their idiocy, to see masochists complain about how badly they have been beaten up, to see naive serial romantics whinge about the ephemeral nature of their partners' affections, and especially to see those, like you, who would like to believe in the the underlying humanity of humanity, but are confronted here by the greater mass of humanity who enjoy nothing more than to hear the plaintive adult versions of the immature "It's not fair!". I note that - entirely appropriately it appears - you even have "whine" as part of your name.

Awe . . . suggests you start a thread called "Healthy Pleasures" and see what responses

that

get s you.

---

Are you intending to inject some humour in to the debate by making me laugh at your apparent lack of basic comprehension skills and bizarre logic?

Well no laughs from me I am afraid i feel sorry for you and your delicate sensibilities... Awe Diddums...

Maybe you should ask your mummy for help with understanding what has been said before sharing.

---

A lack of comprehension? I was basing my comments on a

professional study recently published in the British Journal of Developmental Psychology

, which found that  children as young as four had a righteous sense of schadenfreude, which had developed considerably by the time they were eight years old. Unless you have reasons for suggesting that this is only a pre-adolescent phenomenon - and I have considerable practical evidence to confirm it is not - then I would suggest that it is you who is suffering from a lack of comprehension and logic.

Awe . . . I am afraid that the laugh is on you; I am enjoying your publicly humiliating verbal pratfall.

ETA Particularly since you have demonstrated a considerable degree of moral insensitivity regarding maternal support.

---

You appear to have absolutely no clue what my point was.

Taking pleasure from other peoples failing is not healthy for a community, for the individual targeted for bullying nor for the person taking delight in the others misfortune.

No where did I say it is a mental illness, nor that it is restricted to any age group.

Maternal support? what are you on about? it is the subject of your enjoyment here that has lost their mother and is suffering the same condition.

 I feel very sorry for you, you are so insulted that anyone would have the impertinence, to say hold on a minute.... can you really not think of a more constructive way to find your pleasure than laughing at those suffering misfortune?

You come across as a bit pathetic. Awe Diddums indeed.

[Alicia Sautereau]

He`s here to troll, stop baiting into it

[Awe Thor]

---

Aethelwine wrote:

Taking pleasure from other peoples failing is not healthy for a community

---

Says who? Darwin would definitely have disagreed with you, and so far, I have seen no sign of the meek inheriting the earth, so it's no good quoting the bible.

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

No where did I say it is a mental illness,

---

You said it was unhealthy. It obviously can't be physical, so the only thing that is left is mental. Justify your comment.

 

 

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Maternal support? what are you on about?

---

Did you miss Malanya's complaint that she felt insulted by your comment regarding "Mummy"? She redacted her post when she realised that the emotion provoked in her by you - since she has recently lost her mother - had blinded her to the fact that you were responding to me, not her. The charge of insensitivity stands, however, as you blithely referred to it despite her having pointed out her situation earlier in the thread. Or does your version of morality allow that perverted version of schadenfreude?

---

Aethelwine wrote:

I feel very sorry for you, you are so insulted that anyone would have the impertinence, to say hold on a minute.... can you really not think of a more constructive way to find your pleasure than laughing at those suffering misfortune?

---

I wouldn't waste your empty and obviously insincere pity on me; these are the forums; there is no way that anyone could insult me, certainly not with what you label "impertinence"; I am merely accusing you of simple rudeness to Dresden, combined with an erroneous perspective and a complete misunderstanding of the reasons that a large proportion of the users participate in this forum.

 

 

Awe . . . but please don't let my enlightenment prevent you from exposing yourself to further ridicule.

[Paul Hexem]

---

Alicia Sautereau wrote:

He`s here to troll, stop baiting into it

---

Yeah, that's definitely some trolling going on there. And it's the good kind, 'cause it gets reactions.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Aethelwine wrote:

---

Dresden Ceriano wrote:

---

Gadget Portal wrote:

Wow, did this whole thing escalate out of control.

---

It sure did, but it's been great.  I just love threads where people talk about some interaction they had with a crazy person, only to have that crazy person come along and try to prove how crazy they're not... making themselves look that much more crazy.

...Dres

---

Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about.

---

What sort of nonsense is that? I can't see that you mean

physically

healthy, so you must be disparaging Dresden's

mental

health, in which case perhaps you would like to reference the relevant element of the DSM (either 4 or 5 would do) that supports your contention, since one narrow-minded person's opinion is all that it is.

I entirely agree with Dresden; the Forums are a wonderful place to see morons demonstrate their idiocy, to see masochists complain about how badly they have been beaten up, to see naive serial romantics whinge about the ephemeral nature of their partners' affections, and especially to see those, like you, who would like to believe in the the underlying humanity of humanity, but are confronted here by the greater mass of humanity who enjoy nothing more than to hear the plaintive adult versions of the immature "It's not fair!". I note that - entirely appropriately it appears - you even have "whine" as part of your name.

Awe . . . suggests you start a thread called "Healthy Pleasures" and see what responses

that

get s you.

---

Are you intending to inject some humour in to the debate by making me laugh at your apparent lack of basic comprehension skills and bizarre logic?

Well no laughs from me I am afraid i feel sorry for you and your delicate sensibilities... Awe Diddums...

Maybe you should ask your mummy for help with understanding what has been said before sharing.

---

A lack of comprehension? I was basing my comments on a

professional study recently published in the British Journal of Developmental Psychology

, which found that  children as young as four had a righteous sense of schadenfreude, which had developed considerably by the time they were eight years old. Unless you have reasons for suggesting that this is only a pre-adolescent phenomenon - and I have considerable practical evidence to confirm it is not - then I would suggest that it is you who is suffering from a lack of comprehension and logic.

Awe . . . I am afraid that the laugh is on you; I am enjoying your publicly humiliating verbal pratfall.

ETA Particularly since you have demonstrated a considerable degree of moral insensitivity regarding maternal support.

---

The statement made by Aethelwine was...

"Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about."

The study you cite reports that shadenfreude happens in children and, in the little I could find describing the report, makes no claims about any health effects deriving from it. The presence of shadenfreude is not in doubt. Dresden demonstrated it. The claim to be challenged here is that schadenfreude is not healthy. If the report offers evidence to the contrary, why didn't you mention it?

[Awe Thor]

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

The statement made by Aethelwine was...

"Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about."

The study you cite reports that shadenfreude happens in children and, in the little I could find describing the report, makes no claims about any health effects deriving from it. The presence of shadenfreude is not in doubt. Dresden demonstrated it. The claim to be challenged here is that schadenfreude is not healthy. If the report offers evidence to the contrary, why didn't you mention it?

---

The study offers no indication whatsoever that schadenfreude is not unhealthy. In fact, the tenor of the paper - albeit one written by Germans - implies that schadenfreude is an entirely natural emotion - and the conclusion of the researchers says: "Our data revealed first evidence that schadenfreude might have an important impact on social (i.e. helping) behaviour even among young children. Thus, it is highly important to further analyse the determinants and consequences of schadenfreude. Right now, we are standing at the beginning of the understanding of this emotion."

 

 

Awe . . . is still waiting for any evidence of justification that schadenfreude is unhealthy, as Aethelwine unequivocally stated.

[Tex Monday]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

The study offers no indication whatsoever that schadenfreude is not unhealthy. In fact, the tenor of the paper - albeit one written by Germans - implies that schadenfreude is an entirely natural emotion - and the conclusion of the researchers says: "Our data revealed first evidence that schadenfreude might have an important impact on social (i.e. helping) behaviour even among young children. Thus, it is highly important to further analyse the determinants and consequences of schadenfreude. Right now, we are standing at the beginning of the understanding of this emotion."

 

 

Awe . . . is still waiting for any evidence of justification that schadenfreude is unhealthy, as Aethelwine unequivocally stated.

---

I am not sure if this is the same study, but I did find evidence that schadenfreude can be a bad thing....

The study was from Wilco van Dijk from Leiden University in the Netherlands. he studied 70 graduate students  who read a paper about some high achieving student who was going to land a great job then didn't..etc, etc.

The "Evil" part, as the article states is this....

" We know that it's very good to feel empathy and sympathy for people, so if you feel schadenfreude without any sympathy or compassion for that other person that would not be good. Our society thrives on compassion and empathy."

So, as I read it, it's ok to have schadenfreude as long as you can feel some sympathy or empathy afterwards.

The article is listed in Live Science website http://www.livescience.com/17398-schadenfreude-affirmation.html

Do with it what you wish....

[Awe Thor]

---

Tex Monday wrote that the "researcher" said:

 

" We know that it's very good to feel empathy and sympathy for people,"

---

Do we? Says who? Professional mourners? Charity workers?

---

Tex Monday wrote that the "researcher" said:

 

 Our society thrives on compassion and empathy."

---

Again, says who? Not Darwin. Those further down the food chain might hope for some beneficence from those who are better equipped to survive and thrive, but the latter have usually got that way by identifying and oppressing the weak.

 

 

Tex - thanks for the reference, which highlights the worst aspects of do-gooding social science: do a bit of an experiment, then conclude in line with your unsubstantiated prejudices.

Awe . . . still waits for evidence that schadenfreude is mentally unhealthy.

[Madelaine McMasters]

---

Awe Thor wrote:

---

Madelaine McMasters wrote:

The statement made by Aethelwine was...

"Schadenfreude is not a healthy pleasure to be boasting about."

The study you cite reports that shadenfreude happens in children and, in the little I could find describing the report, makes no claims about any health effects deriving from it. The presence of shadenfreude is not in doubt. Dresden demonstrated it. The claim to be challenged here is that schadenfreude is not healthy. If the report offers evidence to the contrary, why didn't you mention it?

---

The study offers no indication whatsoever that schadenfreude is not unhealthy. In fact, the tenor of the paper - albeit one written by Germans - implies that schadenfreude is an entirely natural emotion - and the conclusion of the researchers says: "Our data revealed first evidence that schadenfreude might have an important impact on social (i.e. helping) behaviour even among young children. Thus, it is highly important to further analyse the determinants and consequences of schadenfreude. Right now, we are standing at the beginning of the understanding of this emotion."

 

 

Awe . . . is still waiting for any evidence of justification that schadenfreude is unhealthy, as Aethelwine unequivocally stated.

---

The evidence that schadenfreude may impact helping behavior is precisely what you should have brought here in first place. I won't blindly trust that you quoted the study accurately, nor will I take the study itself as gospel (I'm simply being as wary as you), but appreciate being made aware of it.

Aethelwine's statement was, I think, easy to comprehend. You had the chance to refute in the first volley and missed it. Instead, you fired off evidence (of shadenfreude in the young) that didn't even graze the target (shadenfreude is unhealthy).

You don't advance a position by waiting for the other side to retreat while you stand still. This MadBagLady is happy to have got you to take a step forward.

Gee, I'm even starting to sound like you!

;-)