3 ms·
> If C doesn't corroborate then perhaps A is the bad actor, spreading false rumours. The problem: you always suspect B of being a bad actor and maybe A. How l
by ARandomerDude 8y ago
> If C doesn't corroborate then perhaps A is the bad actor, spreading false rumours.
The problem: you always suspect B of being a bad actor and maybe A. How long is enough for C to have completed his non-corroboration period?
Gossip destroys relationships with suspicion at every turn.
ETA: please don't take this as an endorsement of gossip being a criminal offense in the Philippines.
- yowlingcat 8y agoI don't think this argument makes sense. The information gossip provides is probabilistic rather than binary. You never really get a "true" answer, but that's the point -- it's just a signal. Suspicions are not created equal; perhaps a major, corroborated, founded suspicion could destroy relationships where a minor one may not.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Gpetrium 8y agoI think it is worth noting that the word gossip has been painted with negative connotation in our society. The moment humans realized that the world is full of information asymmetry and unknowns, they started to gossip. Gossip is a tool to transfer knowledge of others/things to someone who may not have the means to confirm it themselves. In theory, a private reference from a friend to a potential employer about you is gossip (E.g. @ARandomerDude is a trustworthy individual, you should hire him) even thought your friend may not have a full picture of who you are.
- cies 8y agoI believe (personally) that gossip is only things you would not say (or would say considerably different) when the gossiped-about-person is there to overhear it.