To be honest, when I first heard that our topic of discussion was scam/spam data, I was confused. I thought that these spam emails deserved as much thought as I had previously given them–little to none. I was sure that the senders were simply crooks trying to make some easy money and that any person with half a brain could avoid falling victim to these scams.

After reading these two chapters from “The Rumors of the World”, I find myself much more conflicted. I see a whole new side of scams–more accurately put, I see the many facets of scams–and I feel silly for not understanding that these scams reflect larger issues, like political unrest, socioeconomic divides, financial corruption and bullying, etc. Still, I have a hard time being wholly sympathetic towards these scammers.

I agree that there is an art to scamming that is fascinating to study. I agree that scam/spam collectives provide insight into international cash flow that is not as “fair and square” as many people think it is. I agree that many scammers are victims themselves. What I don’t necessarily agree with are claims such as “there are no good or bad guys” or “fraudsters sound like modern Robin Hoods”. While many scammers have good reason to attempt to steal money, so do many criminals–that doesn’t make the act just. It seems to me that saying things like, “Advance-fee scams, then, are no more toxic and only slightly more dubious than the securitized debt schemes that demolished the global economy in 2008” diminishes the depravity of exploiting another person’s suffering to swindle someone else of their money. As Marks pointed out, it is difficult to determine the exact motivation and intention of every scammer, thus making it difficult to make an “ethical evaluation”. I agree with this statement and am potentially being too judgemental, but I would still say that these pieces are perhaps being too indulgent of scam artists. The fascination with scam/spam data, I understand. The coddling of scammers, I do not.