>>You were using strict "either good or bad character" dychotomies. People are much more complicated than that. Such black/white point of view, and dychotomy as a general method of looking at things is deeply ingrained in Judeo-Christian culture, I know, but I think that should be overcome. I think we are capable of thinking in more complex terms, aren't we?
>
>Well even a seemingly benign or nutural character can be bad in some setting. Such as lack of height is neither good or bad normally, but in basket ball it is undesirable and consider a bad characteristic. When was the last time a 6'0" player got drafted. They usually don't last long in the NBA. Heck even 6'6" is consider short, unless you have skills of Michael Jordan.

I thought the draft was repealed after Vietnam :).

Don't confuse the height with character. So let's stay with your first sentence, with which I agree. Some character features can be desirable or undesirable, depending on the setting. Overall neatness can be annoying in a theater director, but welcome in an accountant. Trusting is generally desirable, unless you're an insurance adjuster or a detective. Honesty is also good, unless you're a spy. Etc, etc.

And then you have differences within the same person: one can be very honest, forgiving and gentle with his faimly, while being an animal to his employees. Or can be boring in real life, but have a very funny alter ego on UT :).