?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Poisen Ivy - The Mad Ramblings of Nchanter — LiveJournal [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
Nchanter

[ website | nchanted.net ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Poisen Ivy [Jul. 14th, 2003|09:28 am]
Nchanter
[emotional state |optimisticoptimistic]
[song on the wind |jerry, in the dance lab, playing for the modern class]

i give everyone a second chance. i can't think of anyone who i haven't given a second chance to. this includes people like abusive ex-boyfriends and the would-be rapist. this is how i almost got raped twice, by the same person. so maybe i'm too trusting, to forgiving, have an over-sized sense of loyalty. if i'm willing to let someone in i like to think... i like to think i'm a good judge of character. it's gotten better with time.

there are some people i've given more than their second chance (i consider the pre-screwing up period as their first chance), but everyone gets atleast one. i think that's why i got so frustraited with a certain un-named scribbler and a certain un-named ball of static (CLING!) when i didn't get a second chance. i was still on my first one. so some people subscribe to the "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" theory. i subscribe to the "your allowed ONE fuck up without (many) consequences theory" but i am known to give more than one chance, and often, more chances than a person deserves. the longer i've known you, the more chances you get. probably.

i'm seeing someone today, who i am essentially giving another chance. as i justified it to gwen (other than me not needing to justify it at all) "they only had one fuck up, technically, though it was a big one, not a huge one, but a big one, that kept on compounding due more to other people's manipulation than their own fault"

this person has grown since then, and i'm happy for them. that's why i decided, on an off chance, to see if this was possible, and it looks like we can go back to being friends, as they were an AWESOME friend, and i've missed them alot.

yes i'm being gender ambiguouse, deal with it. if all goes well y'all will beable to figure it out soon enough. and no, it's not a hooking up friend, just someone i was close with at somepoint. They were also someone who the pillow-designs i was doing/will do again were originally made for. but they will probably benefit from my added experience in that field, and furthered addiction to pritty fabrics :-)

hopefully i'll have a happy post about that this evening :-)

oh, and speaking of happy posts, did i mention james called yesterday??? :-)
linkReply

Comments:
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
[User Picture]From: nchanter
2003-07-14 07:22 am (UTC)

Re:

exactly.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: sugary828
2003-07-14 07:39 am (UTC)
I agree completely. While I've been told by many people that some people just don't deserve second chances, I can't help but remember what happened before they fucked up, what a friend they were, why I liked them to begin with and so on. They usually haven't changed that much... I'd rather know if the friendship or whatnot could be fixed, or if there was anything left then wonder... that's why I always give second, third, fourth etc chances. And while sometimes even I get sick of trying and waiting for a change and so on, there are some people who while I don't make an effort to talk to them anymore because it just isn't worth it, I'd gladly answer the phone and make plans if they called...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: soleklypse
2003-07-14 07:45 am (UTC)

Prisoners' Dilemma

You've probably heard of the prisoners' dilemma. Even if you haven't, you're probably familiar with it. The idea is that you have to conspirators in separate interrogation rooms. Each one is offered the same deal. If your partner keeps quiet and you keep quiet, you'll both go to jail for a year. If your partner keeps quiet, but you rat on your partner, then you'll get away free, but your partner will be in prizon for five years. On the other hand, the same goes for your partner and if she rats and you and you keep quiet, you'll get the five years while she goes free. And of course, if you both rat on each other, then you'll each get 3-4 years. So what do you do?
This situation was boiled down to it's basic components and rating/keeping quiet was changed to betraying/cooperating. Some people put together a situation called the iterated prisoners' dilemma in which individuals would interact with each other a number of times, each time scoring points (inversely proportional to the number of years in prison they would have gotten). People would program agents to make the decision of whether or not to cooperate with each other agent and try to score the most points (either by cooperating or by screwing the other guy).
Some people came up with really long and elaborate decision processes based on trying to predict what the other guy would do and so on. However, the most successful strategy was really quite simple: tit-for-tat. Tit-for-tat would always start trusting (i.e., cooperating). After that, it would do exactly what the other agent did, the last time they interacted. People tried other similar strategies such as betraying the first time or "holding a grudge" by betraying twice for every time the agent was betrayed, but none of these worked as well. Another interesting feature was that, unlike some agents, it was best for everyone (especially tit-for-tat) if everyone knew how tit-for-tat operated.
Unfortunately, real life isn't as simple as a computer game. But I still think that that basic premise applies.
(Reply) (Thread)