Posts by Riddley Walker
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
maybe its the bits of fingernail and hair in soup?
-
Getting PERFed on dubious grounds... 200K
Getting your colleagues to pay you for damaging their reputations by association... priceless -
isn't cretin the stuff hair and fingernails are made of? don't they put lots of cretin in fancy shampoo and stuff?
-
yes for sure. regardless of the desirability or 'positivity' of the behaviour. punishers reduce future likelihood of recurrance, reinforcers increase their likelihood. the +ve / -ve just relates to whether a stimulus is being introduced or withdrawn.
so taking advantage of a person's good nature, if they found out they were being taken advantage of, could be considered:1) positive punishment from the pov of that person feeling hurt, used etc, ie. the addition of an aversive stimulus
2) negative punishment from pov of that person's sense of trust or friendship being destroyed, ie. removal of appetitive stimuli
that's how the behavioural theory goes anyway. to some extent it's a matter of how you frame the stimuli involved. for example giving a food reward to a hungry subject (assuming they don't have food phobias) can be seen as the addition of an appetitive stimulus or the removal of an aversive stimulus (hunger). it goes on and on...
-
no worries reece, definitely some of my opinions are full of shit but i must say PA provides me with a jolly healthy enema once and a while.
-
An 'Obsessive/Abstract cross perhaps? i'd like to say Malicious but he wasn't that stupid.
-
that is an interesting paper on trolls stephen - i especially liked the bit about 'erectile dysfunction and enuresis'! that is very funny. i always suspected as much.
not so sure about the socialistic tendencies of some troll types though, i got the feeling our mate wasn't much of a lefty.but just to be a nerdy tosspot, i note however they refer to the best treatment for troll (ie. challenging their assertions and pointing out the inferiority of their arguments) as 'negative reinforcement', when it is actually either negative punishment (withdrawal of hubris) or positive punishment (delivering a stimulus they find aversive). anything that reduces the frequency of a behaviour is by definition punishment. didn't seem to work on our dear friend though, i guess good things take time, what. the advantages of a moderator eh.
-
yes but deborah, umm actually i am all those things.
except risible. no way am i risible.
and why are people so anti cretins? all the kiwis that over there say they're really nice. in the immortal words of Waverly, he must be a bit of a palestine. -
hmm, maybe there is a god after all?
bugger -
cheers don. i can't say i want a govt of fools and crooks and i think i have rather high expectations of elected officials. can't say i've always been happy with this govt either. but when the msm criticisms are consistently skewed it actually starts to punish those who are doing a good job as well as those who don't ie. it has no discriminating corrective function. or worse yet it can have the perverse outcome of promoting poor behaviour.
i think it is a deeply irresponsible behaviour in anyone who likes to think they are part of a fourth estate.