Scrupuli

Date: 27 June 2017

Thank you, but no, I will not be registering for the @grinnell.edu alumni “lifetime” email address. About fifteen years ago, I gratefully took you up on the offer of an @alumni.grinnell.edu “lifetime” email address which you are on the point of cancelling. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

The cancellation makes no sense. On one hand, it is simple and cheap to run email service for a domain. On the other hand, the cancellation is complicated and expensive to the end users. I sympathize with anyone who has lost a supposedly “lifetime” email address. One of the benefits of such an address is providing it to other Internet services, knowing that it will always work. You have cost every such person hours in cleanup, plus the worry that no important services have been overlooked.

For four years, I was the person at Grinnell held accountable for email systems serving over 2,000 people. I would have agonized over such a discourtesy to alumni. I cannot imagine doing it. And I can imagine the uproar coming from the Alumni office if I had tried.

By the way: you have a short memory. You describe the existing service as seven years old, which is either mistaken or misleading. A quick look at archives shows I have been using it since at least April 2002.

Sincerely,

Edward McGuire ’84
Grinnell College Computer Services staff alumnus
Fort Worth, Texas

Possibly The White House Organic Farm Project¹ now offer Russian and Ukrainian computer viruses, pirated software, and drugs to enlarge the penis and treat erectile dysfunction, pain, obesity, anxiety, insomnia, and other conditions.

Or else they failed to protect the confidentiality of an e-mail address which only they and I knew.

Because the facts seem to be that someone is sending spam to an address which I (i) created specifically for them, (ii) gave only to them, and (iii) did not write down or save anywhere.

1. The White House Organic Farm Project (TheWhoFarm), http://www.thewhofarm.org/.

Misdirection: inviting you to tell more about yourself than you realize

The e-mail baits you into action. It calls the bill a product of corrupt acts: “secret negotiations, sweetheart deals for certain Members, and rule-bending procedural gimmicks”. This will delight or antagonize you, depending on whether you agree or disagree with the Republican Party position on this bill.

Having gotten your attention (the bait), the e-mail then immediately invites you to click a link (take the bait) to complete a survey. You are primed by your enthusiasm (or indignation) to do so.

The link you click is the hook. It doesn’t go straight to the survey.

Here are some of the links which take you to Rep. Burgess’ survey. Notice each one has a different ID:

http://burgess.house.gov/Components/Redirect/r.aspx?ID=50286-00000001
http://burgess.house.gov/Components/Redirect/r.aspx?ID=50286-00000002
http://burgess.house.gov/Components/Redirect/r.aspx?ID=50286-12345678
http://burgess.house.gov/Components/Redirect/r.aspx?ID=50286-99999999
[...]

When you see a system like this, it generally means each copy of the e-mail has a different ID. That lets your e-mail address be linked to your survey results.

The survey comes up on your screen, with two questions: (1) Email Address for future email updates (more spam), and (2) are you opposed to the bill (Yes/No/Unsure).

Still enthusiastic, you answer.

Remember: even if you do not give an e-mail address on the survey, your original e-mail address can be linked to your survey response. So Rep. Burgess can know how you voted.

You now enthusiastically forward the original e-mail to your like minded friends. Some of them vote. Some of them give Rep. Burgess their e-mail address on the survey. Now, Rep. Burgess can know not only how you voted, but who your friends are, and how they voted.

But that’s only half of the fun.

Propaganda: using the results for greater influence

For more delight, let’s look at the first question of the survey itself: the Email Address for future email updates. The first question of a survey is the one that is most likely to be answered. So a survey will put the most important question first. Why is this question the most important to Rep. Burgess?

It’s important because it influences you. If you oppose Rep. Burgess, or if you support the bill that he opposes, then you won’t want his e-mail updates. So the first question of the survey deflates a lot of your enthusiasm for completing the survey. In other words, people who agree with Rep. Burgess are more likely to complete the survey.

This is an example of what is called self selection bias. Rep. Burgess’ survey responses will lean towards people who agree with his position. Therefore, so will his survey results.

One way Rep. Burgess can capitalize on this situation is to influence other House members. He could claim he surveyed my mailing list and found that the results were strongly against the bill, more strongly than you would expect if only Republicans opposed it.

Another way is to influence voters at reelection time. He could claim voters can trust him to listen to his constituents, pointing out that he voted against the health bill after surveying his mailing list and finding mostly opposition.

Rep. Burgess should be careful not to point out that his mailing list is not limited to constituents, and that his e-mail could and probably was forwarded to many people not on his list and living outside his district. The e-mail specifically says, “health care reform will affect every single American, so I want to hear from you”—inviting responses from people outside his district.

I do not in any way mean to single Rep. Burgess out for criticism. The e-mail and survey system he uses is the regular House Of Representatives system. It is designed to be used the way he did. Therefore I have no reason to doubt that his survey is a fair example of what all our Representatives from all political parties are doing as a matter of routine.

Delightful, isn’t it?