Moralretrolling (or Sorry Friends For the Social Experiment)

[I know I still haven't finished putting up the Halloween/wedding photos. In time you will all know the shocking truth. Detours and whatnot. It's not like I've even got to last year's "Best of 2011" music post, so whatevs.] 

Yesterday morning when I got up, I was alerted to some really awesome and hilarious trolling courtesy JeShirt.com (cross-reference the Twitter, blog, and and Facebook pages for the complete saga). I've also been consuming quite a bit of media with trolling and double-crossing lately (Hitchock spy films, Trapped in the Closet, WWF, Borat, On Cinema Podcast) and was inspired to do some of my own. The target was those absolutely ridiculous Facebook reposts, mostly of the "something about privacy" sort that has been plaguing our news feeds over the past few days. This shit all happened already several months ago, but it must've been before Election Day when all of our memories were wiped.

Quite a few friends had been reposting this bullshit yet again, so I figured it was time to do something that would be hilarious to me for a while that we could go back and learn a lesson from then we all have a laugh together. Moral-retro-trolling-LOLing or something. Here's the original post:

In response to the new Facebook guidelines I hereby declare that my copyright is attached to all of my personal details, illustrations, comics, paintings, professional photos and videos, etc. (as a result of the Berner Convention). For commercial use of the above my written consent is needed at all times.  

(Anyone reading this can copy this text and paste it on their Facebook Wall. This will place them under protection of copyright laws. By the present communiqué, I notify Facebook that it is strictly forbidden to disclose, copy, distribute, disseminate, or take any other action against me on the basis of this profile and/or its contents. The aforementioned prohibited actions also apply to employees, students, agents and/or any staff under Facebook's direction or control. The content of this profile is private and confidential information. The violation of my privacy is punished by law (UCC 1 1-308-308 1-103 and the Rome Statute).

Facebook is now an open capital entity. All members are recommended to publish a notice like this, or if you prefer, you may copy and paste this version. If you do not publish a statement at least once, you will be tacitly allowing the use of elements such as your photos as well as the information contained in your profile status updates.

Something like that at least. Whatever it was it was clearly pointless bullshit that amounted to nothing. I then took that text and modified it so it said the exact opposite of the original message (and added in some things that would be dead giveaways as to its authenticity):

I tried to work in the Asian Dawn Movement from Hans Gruber's communique, but went for Looney Tunes instead. I immediately had second thoughts about posting it because another friend had just minutes before posted a very clear "Come on people, stop falling for this scam" plea. But I risked the nose-in-the-book penalty and hit "post."

Not too long after I posted my mess, I got a "like" from a former lawyer/current writer who I'm sure navigated my BS legalese. Then there was a response from someone that clearly understood my culture jamming with a Banksy joke and I retorted with another nod from the troll classic, Exit Through The Gift Shop. I figured the jig was up before it was ever down.

HOWEVER, I immediately spotted a couple reposts. I assumed they were ironic reposts, BUT THEY WEREN'T!

I prematurely gloated on Twitter that some were non-ironic posts, but soon realized that none were.   I then made the decision to stay in troll mode if anyone questioned me on it, because that's really the secret to successful performance art. Of course, when actual funny people do successful performance art, they aren't usually making their friends the victims.

My good friend with the dark squiggles did everything right (if it had been an actual reposting of the original bullshit text). He immediately called me out and directed me to Snopes.com, a skeptical website that had already debunked the legitimacy of the source material. I've long been a fan of the Snopes website and subscribe to the "Checking snopes before forwarding dumb emails" Facebook group. Since I regularly throw it in people's faces myself, I'm familiar with the popular retort "I don't trust Snopes. It's full of liberal bias" (SPOILER: it's not). I felt like such a ignorant superdouchebag repeating it. Half-wanting to get caught, I tried to draw hearsay-style attention to the Derpa Convention, but he stuck to his original guns and the argument fizzled into a into a Mr. Show skit.

Elsewhere, more of the right thing was happening, for the most part, despite my egotistical attempts to thwart it. 

Here I learned that people are immune to, or are at least aware of older social media scams, but are not necessarily ready to take a stand against newer ones as quickly. My trolling here again sticks out like a sore thumb on a jerk that could have been more productive in the anti-fraud movement instead of the chuckling-to-himself movement. To be honest, I feel pretty shitty just posting these exchanges, even with the blurred names, but there's a greater good somewhere here, right? And to my credit, I'm not actually lying in any of my responses. If you read between the lines, most of them amount "Go back and read between the lines."

This one was deleted not too long after someone figured out what was going on:

Finally, the text I rewrote was actually being read. And then we've got the admission that sometimes, we don't read what we're signing on to. I think it's safe to draw the conclusion that people, when they are tired or vulnerable, sometimes cling to things just because they seem like they mean well, even if they actually mean the opposite and serve to take advantage. It's a horrible thing, but it happens all the time with get rich quick schemes and cold call scams. In comparison, a simple repost may seem like a harmless piece of nothing, but blind trust is a gateway drug to getting totally fucked with.

And that person totally fucking with you, and totally feeling troll's remorse at this point, may not be me next time.

Blue Squiggles was the one that reposted my text in that example, but Purple Squiggles called him out on it, thinking the text was about protecting copyright. So I jumped in to ask stupid questions and escalated the situation using Godwin's Law of Nazi Analogies as soon as I had the opportunity. Just when I thought the conversation had hit a Ludicrous enough Speed to expose my trolling, Purple Squiggles lit up my chat window. And yes, she again made great points about the futility of trying to protect copyright on publicly-traded social media websites, but still didn't actually read the text that was posted. To her credit, she did note the sarcasm in my growing electioneering, but I admitted nothing.

A few degrees of separation away was someone that did get it:

That sort of made up for my regret. The experiment dried up pretty quickly after that (though I get to play dumb for my soon-to-be brother-in-law and accuse Gizmodo of being in bed with Facebook). On the whole, only a small handful people took the bait which means either:

1. people read it, got it, and didn't respond
2. people saw the first few words, dismissed it, and didn't respond 
3. people already don't read anything I post and/or have my posts hidden

Assuming that the 2 and 3 are the more likely scenarios, then I've accomplished very little more other than squeezing out a blog entry, and possibly making myself look like The RoBeast Who Cried Wolf. It's also going to mean that people probably aren't going to see this post either and realize that I was joking the whole time.

I did learn that even skeptical people are guilty of not fully examining their materials. People are ready to jump all over each other for reposting unread nonsensical text, but then end up not reading the instructions to their own Jump to Conclusions Mat. On one hand, I've never seen such an immediate response from the Facebook masses rushing to invoke the Snopes Defense before. But it's also a bit sad that with all the daily bullshit we see on there, people are only well-mobilized against a low-scale Facebook scam. It's a start I guess.

Well, thank you for participating in my half-baked experiment, willingly or otherwise, and I'm sorry for screwing with you. I did my best to cover up everyone's names other than my own. If I missed any, let me know. If you still don't believe I was trolling the whole time, then I'm just going to assume you're trolling. 

American Express: The Gift That Gives To Itself

Today I started using my first big boy wallet. There's no velcro or a hole to attach a chain, no dated tribal designs or embroidered elephants, and it isn't made out of duct tape. It's just a boring bi-fold leather thing that won't seem to stay closed on its own. Even though I just tossed out a lot of extraneous plastic and paper (FYI--I stopped carrying my Ren & Stimpy Yak Shaving Day card when it expired back in '00), I still have too much crap in it.

There's one item that seems to be getting smaller since I first received it though--an American Express Gift Card in the amount of $50. I received it from a boss of mine as a work incentive for doing something I can't recall years ago. My plan was pool it together with other gift certificates I'd received from the company and buy myself a laptop.

Well, as it turns out, American Express cards don't sit around and wait for you to spend them. Like regular credit cards, they expire, but... the fucking money disappears from them years before the expiration date. Let me blow up the fine print for you:

"Subject to $2.00 monthly service fee applies, but is waived for the first 12 months after purchase."

My $50 gift card that I just activated for the first time today is actually only worth $38 (if I use it today, that is). Doing the math, this means American Express started deducting its "fee" 6 months ago, and the card was purchased 18 total months ago.  The card "expires" in July 2011. Yeah, the fucking $12 that would still be left on it in July 2011.  Considering that American Express actually charges $3.95 for a $50 card in the first place, this is a real scam and a half.

Is it my fault for not reading the fine print and spending the money sooner? Sure, I guess it is a little bit, but seriously, who would assume that a gift card would have strings attached? besides the obvious and reasonable expiration date, of course. But who in their right mind would assume that a service fee would be applied TO SOMETHING THAT'S NOT EVEN BEING USED. Serve me, and then I can see you collecting service fee. I mean, it's a gift, and they're cool with robbing from it? American Express can lick Ticketmaster's fucking taint while it gets a dinosaur diarrhea burrito stuck up its ass.

Sorry, I've been watching too much Angry Video Game Nerd.

fuMusic

On a crazy drunken winter's eve, I signed up for two competing music services--eMusic and Rhapsody. They were both advertising heavily on the television during the Christmas season back in 05' and I was looking for some instant music gratification that had nothing to do with Apple. I was easily impressed by their one month trial offers.

Rhapsody had all major label music streaming at the touch of a button. They offered a few downloads per month, but the streaming music would require a subscription to maintain. eMusic stuck to strictly independent labels, and anything you downloaded, you got to keep. It was DRM-free, and I could re-download any song in the future if I needed to. At the end of one month, I felt very comfortable using both sites. So comfortable that I completely forgot about the free one-month trials ending and got charged for both.

After another month I decided that eMusic was the way to go for me. They had plenty of new, weird music for me to discover. The prices were excellent and I felt comfortable downloading experimental tracks that I probably wouldn't have ever discovered or purchased on CD. I stayed with them for several years and trillions of downloads, but five months ago, eMusic and I finally broke up.

Those last few months were difficult for both of us. I felt a bit inundated by the amount of downloads I had amassed and and found increasing difficulty in using my full download credit each month. eMusic often added new music, but the math metal genre never seemed to be a priority. They added albums by Thom Yorke and Paul McCartney and bragged incessantly about it, but I had no interest in that direction. I decided to self-suspend my account for three months and see if I could live without the service.

As my return date drew near, I went to the website and Michael Jackson was on the front page. Ok, he had just died, so that made sense, but he was as far from being an indie artist as possible. Somehow his downloads were made available. I researched it on some music news sites and it turned out that eMusic had just signed a gigantic deal with the major labels and gained access to their catalogs. This was insane. On one hand it could be considered a much needed rejuvenation of their selection, but at the same time, it completely pissed upon their sacred indie ground.

I didn't know how I felt about all this until I heard they would be restructuring their download credit system and price plans. It was at this point that I decided to sign in, refresh my normal monthly plan, use my 65 downloads, and ride away clean. I logged in, confirmed my plan, entered my new credit card info, then was promptly and painfully given a corporate reality check. Immediately upon credit card approval, the page showing my 65 download plan disappeared from the existence and I was suddenly being called a "convert" with only 37 downloads. I wasn't just pissed because of the bait-and-switch, but also because I wasn't informed by eMusic at any time that prices and plans were changing, let alone when and how, and I certainly wasn't happy about being automatically "converted" just by signing in. After trying multiple times to speak to someone on their customer service hotline, I fired off my missive:

To: cs@help.emusic.com
Subject: Billing Inquiries

I just went to the site today (July 6) to reactivate my account which had been on hold since April 25. The reactivation screen showed my plan of 65 downloads per month for $14.99. I needed to enter my new credit card information in order to log-in as I've updated my card in the past few months.

As soon as the system approved my credit card, I discovered that my account suddenly only showed 37 available downloads. I haven't logged-on in a few months so I know my download allotment should be fully refreshed at 65. My billing statement is also showing me as a "convert" which I definitely did not authorize.

"July 6, 2009 3:50:18 PM Convert: eMusic Plus $14.99 000PI6VZ-070609"

I called the customer service billing department 4 times and each time I was hung up on without even getting a word in edgewise. I tried the technical department and got the same treatment. As a customer for over three years, I would have appreciated a little better service than that. I want my $14.99 refunded to my credit card and then I want my subscription canceled.

24 hours later, a response:

Thank you for contacting eMusic Customer Support.

We’re sorry but the plan you are requesting has been retired and replaced by the Plus that gives you 37 downloads for $14.99 every thirty days. In addition, you received [or will receive] a free 15- download Booster Pack 30 days after your new plan starts [or started] as a special thank you for being an eMusic member.

The change in your plan is related to a major expansion to eMusic’s catalog that began on July, 2009. Nearly 200,000 tracks are being added, including many of the most loved names in music like The Clash. As part of this change, we’ve had to revise our subscription plans but are pleased to still offer you an un-matched deal on music downloads – less than half the average price per download from iTunes and Amazon.

We’re sorry that we’ve had to retire your old plan but we’re confident that you’ll find even more music to love among the many new additions to the catalog. And of course, you can always select a different plan from the Plan Options page within Your Account.

Regards,
Rxxxxxx

Not only were they lowering everyone's downloads per month (under the guise of "we're still cheaper than Amazon and iTunes"), but it was going to take more credits to download these "most loved names" anyway. And you would no longer be able to cherry pick tracks from albums. Fuck the fucking Clash and fuck your fuzzy math eSCREWsic.

To: "Billing"
Subject: RE: Billing Inquiries

Wait... so you're taking away 28 of my 65 downloads immediately with no warning, and then offering me 15 "free" downloads that won't take affect until I get charged (and short changed) a second time 30 days later? Why would I bother sticking around long enough to pay again for "free" downloads?

If you were really sorry, you would have at least acknowledged the issues I raised in my original email (bait-and-switch on my account status, lack of appropriate customer service over the phone, lack of communication) and offered to honor my refund.

I'm sorry, but I don't believe you're going to continue to receive my business in August.

Hello:

Thank you for contacting eMusic Customer Support.

Your eMusic account associated with the email address xxxx@xxxxxxxx.com is now canceled.

I also escalated your issue to see what I could do for you. My manager has authorized an exception to our no-refund policy on your behalf. We have issued you a refund in the amount of $14.99.

Please note that your bank can take up 5-7 business days to process your refund once we issue it. If you do not see an adjustment to your account after this time, please contact us so we can research your issue for you.

To reactivate your account, simply log in, select the plan you would like, and follow the prompts to reactivate your account. Please also note that your download history will be removed from our database if you do not rejoin within 60 days.

Regards,
Mxxxx

Something tells me that I probably wasn't the only one being escalated. I decided to take them up on their refund and never looked back. I mean, unless you count this entry as looking back. I can't tell you how eMusic is doing right now, but I personally saw a lot of public complaints in blogs and forums. Sure, it's anecdotal evidence and I don't know how many of those people actually followed through on their threats. I did, and I can't be the only one. The CEO of eMusic said this in August: "We haven’t yet seen a rise in subscription cancellations due to the new price plans. This is something we’re monitoring very closely." I'm curious if that answer is the same today. I wonder if it was worth pissing loyal customers off in order to get into bed with the majors.

As a result of all this, I've been listening to lots of garbage on the radio, but at least I'm saving money by not paying for it. I really haven't bought many CDs this year at all. I've discovered even fewer new artists than ever before. I don't know what's good in the music world these days. Maybe I'm better off.