3 ms·
> What he did here was the equivalent of say, farting in your face because it is "within the rules" (i.e. not illegal) and then act surprised when this made him
by serhei 17y ago
> What he did here was the equivalent of say, farting in your face because it is "within the rules" (i.e. not illegal) and then act surprised when this made him socially excluded.
I am pretty sure I could obtain a legally binding restraining order against someone who kept doing this to me.
- GavinB 17y agoIn meatspace there are police officers and judges who will interpret the law to stop people from causing trouble. There's also the threat of physical violence. Prof Myers found an environment where he was safe from punishment, and started griefing. People got mad. Wow, annoy people and they get mad. Great study. You've really advanced science with this one!
- frossie 17y agoWell of course it is defensible to study what happens when you get people mad. For example I read a great account of a social anthropologist who queue-jumped on purpose to study how (English) people dealt with it. But the scientist queue jumping knew she was doing something wrong (and felt terrible doing it too). The strange thing is that in this account (which I hope is misrepresented) the researcher seems surprised that violating the social norm got him a hostile reaction.
- mstevens 17y agoThe queue jumping sounds like Kate Fox, she talks about it in _Watching the English_ but I wouldn't be surprised to see it written up elsewhere too. http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2004/5/3/53732.html http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2004/5/3/53732.html is the best link I could find quickly.
- frossie 17y agoIt was Kate Fox. I would have plugged the book (which is funny and thought-provoking reading) but I don't know how many people here are interested in the English tribe :-)