For context, premises and propositions, read "Objective take on emotion (Test 1)" and "Objective take on emotion (Test 2)"

In summary:
"I assert that joy comes from knowing that we understood the contents of our sensory information streams (perceptions), and suffering comes from knowing that we did not understand the contents of our sensory information streams (perceptions). Joy and suffering can be shared between any 2 humans and each can feel the opposite of the other regarding the same perceptions.

"I further assert that all emotions can be traced back to the 8 possibilities-- known or unknown comprehension in self or other, and known or unknown confusion in self or other."

Without going into too much detail, on 8/30/13, a fellow Gulch member pointed out that a comment of mine had a 0 rating (a user gave it a thumb's down). I noticed that 2-3 other comments in the thread had a 0 rating. I was concerned about why the comments were being voted down by fellow members of the Gulch, so I looked at all of my comments and discovered that 20+ comments of mine had 0 ratings. Critical points, questions, benign comments, playful banter, etc.

"It was the music I think" - 0 rating.
"Couldn't resist, could you?" - 0 rating.
"If anyone felt entitled to help themselves to all of my computers, they'd need lots of guns and a big truck." - 0 rating.
"I'm not stoic yet, but I'm getting there." - 0 rating.
"The day or the post?" - 0 rating.

The only conclusion that I could come up with was that I had offended someone, and that someone was searching for my comments and voting them down for no particular reason other than that I'd written something offensive. Frankly, I got extremely "angry".

As it happens, this is a great example for the application of my objective theory of emotions.

There are any number of knee-jerk responses to anger, as well as long term consequences to persistent anger.

Examples:
I could surmise that their are vindictive idiots in the Gulch, and it's a waste of time to be here. I could give it up and leave. - A ridiculous overreaction that would only hurt me.

I could attempt to flush out the person negating my comments with a provocative post challenging himself/herself to stop being such a coward and give reasons for negating my comments. - Been there, done that, not such a great idea.

I could blow it off and have "faith" that justice prevails. - Wishful thinking.

I could surmise that there are too many people among us, just waiting to negate anything meaningful that I have to say, and conclude that it is not worth speaking out. - Proclaim myself a victim and wallow in self pity.

Etc.

Finally, using my objective theory of emotions, I can trace my anger back to my failure to understand the purpose of personal attack. I can also surmise that the person who was insulted failed to understand my comments. The source of my anger was confusion, and the perceptual pain from which confusion arose. I can dismiss the experience as irrelevant, cease to be angry, and continue to assert my claim to freedom of speech whether or not others grant me that freedom or not. - Continue to contribute to and advance the causes that I choose to.


Practical Application:
Let's assume I am your 7 year old child. How would you instruct me to deal with my anger in this situation in order to ensure that I became a producer rather than a looter?

I have much more to say on the topic, but that's all for now.

Respectfully,
Wonky, a.k.a. word salad, a.k.a. point pimp