2. They buck the fuck up. They consider their life choices and actions. They think about what led them to be ostracized. And maybe, just maybe...they change for the better.
Genetics has shown us that throughout natural history that the genes of "desirable" traits get passed on in society, and "undesirable" ones eventually die off.
Maybe the practice of "outcasting" is the mechanism by which society ensures the accurate and beneficial propagation of its "memetic code".
Who decides what "better" is? The socioculture is not stable and has only grown more volatile with the slow invasion of internet into the common man's life. All evidence indicates electronics are not compatible with the prototypical normal human being's mental well-being or development in any way. The introduction of weak-ass versions of our net2.0 via television and radio singlehandedly ruined how decades of politics, centuries of social discourse, and millennia upon millennia of war were handled. The "better" of yesterday that would have seen you bullied are now methods of accruing social clout.
The biggest fallacy in applying evolutionary theory is a progressive shortening of timescales. It's one thing to insist that you feel the burden of evolution over even a period of time as short as 20,000 years, there's at least a case to be made there, but the present state of education is not only invented, but
new. Schools as we know them have only been around a few hundred years and their unique problems are not evolutionary-tested. Ostracization itself is no doubt a method of social control and threat elimination, but the time-scale it works on is far greater than you might think, and more importantly, the
target of this ostracization is archaic. Over the past two thousand years the brunt of our advancements as a species has been conducted by a bunch of no-good nerds and degenerates (many of which probably deserved or would have pages on a Kiwi Farms if one existed) yet they have for just as long been the target of outcasting in general; it is actually fair to say that as the cultures of the world grew more functional and advanced, degenerates have only become more tolerated over time. This is not the case with bullying. What gives?
The immune system doesn't know what is "accurate and beneficial", it just knows what should be there, and what shouldn't. Unlike in previous generations where various pressures were applied to force similar outcomes in social acceptability, the new generation often more free in some way than the old but not always, yet now identical pressures are applied to everyone and they are weak. Kids are no longer forced to be tolerant (more accurately polite) by the threat of a beating, and since they learn almost entirely observational and people grow more intolerant with age, they are forced into an environment with few controls, no interest in being there, emergent social politics, and no autonomous reason to tolerate the degenerates and nerds they're thrown in a room with. What emerges from this mess is what you would expect, then, stripped of all the socially enforced patience that peaked with a bunch of faggot nerd assholes freeing everyone from tyranny and granting them unprecedented quality of life: a preference for only the most strong and sociable and distinct disdain for the weird one out. Exceptional sociologists proceed to scratch their head and screech at the education system as it stands in the entire developed world they have no clue why this is happening and that their meta-analysis says that doing it this way should have eliminated all social inequality by the 60's because critical theory is a hell of a drug.
That's what bullying actually is, if we're using biological analogies. A premature allergic reaction hosted in an underdeveloped system designed by half power-drunk Gods of Wisdom and Power™ and beset by foreign bodies of the dot com. Neonatal autoimmune disease for the new generation. The worst thing is that it doesn't even fucking work, as evidenced by the constant degradation of societal norms. "Strong and social" was accurate and beneficial and better in 10,000 BC, but there's no real evidence those things were compatible with humanity what humanity was becoming as it crested into the 20th century, nor is there any evidence that they're in any way compatible with the encroaching technology. More importantly, even if it was still all of those things, the people who are both legitimately "strong and social" are becoming a smaller minority over time, so it isn't fucking working.
To throw one last wrench in, what is the Farms then? A lot more discriminatory, for one. Lolcows tend to be of age or at least flagrantly mentally ill and there's a defacto code of ethics that gets followed usually in 'if they aren't funny, move on'. Unlike bullying which kills the potential growth of genius idiots with fucked up brains who could still be obscenely rich someday, the Farms at this point deals with primarily the outcomes of said bullying, the people who failed that "became normal" lottery you referenced before. It's also good evidence that the internet is fucking everything up in a really intrinsic way, because
how can you socially ostracize people you are not social with? Very few people have real contact with lolcows outside of trolling bids or knew them beforehand, an overwhelming minority. They also have very minimal impact on those who abandon the internet fast enough, as if it's a whole different ecosystem. 'Don't go near the water or the Croc will bite!', or Kiwi in this case I guess. You can choose to dissociate from social media and 'net public affairs most of the time but that is not the case with public education.