Tit-for-Tat? The other other cheek?

When you hear of an exchange between people described as "tit for tat", do you pause and brace for a a bad turn of events?

If so, you are just like us. We tend to associate it with less than happy outcomes. But experts see it quite differently. This quote is from the 1984 issue of Reason:

Nice strategies, Axelrod found, are in general much more successful than mean ones. And Tit-for-Tat tends to be most successful because of its capacity to establish stable cooperative relationships. While it punishes defection, it holds no grudges.

An aside: see, reason never goes out of fashion.

"No grudges" is of tremendous importance in this reasoning. Because this not very common. Open any newspaper or go to any news site and you see immediately: grudges are everywhere. And the criminal justice system of just about every nation is codified grudges. But we do not want to spend time on this aspect.

The aspect of cooperating with other individuals and organizations is our interest here.

The discussion started when, last winter, TheEditor of the K-Landnews put on another of its* victory dances, as we have come to call them. This is rather close to my approach to life, it said.
Patiently, we got the information out of the joyous TheEditor. This scientist on NPR explained various versions of tit for tat, you see. Let's say, two people first meet. One is nice to the other, and the other responds in a not nice manner. How would you continue as the one who started out nice? Should you go "not nice" because this is how you were treated in response? I'll be nice even in the face of hostility, it quipped. And if the other side continues to be hostile, I'll be nice again. If it does not stop, I will switch to tat.

That was all? Oh well.

* TheEditor insists on full gender neutrality.