AOL users and Urban Legends

[Kochanski]

Today I received another Urban Legend email from one of my friends. This one was about hotel keycards as a way for people to steal your identity. It sounded fishy to me immediately, so off I went to Snopes and within 30 seconds I had confirmed that it was indeed an UL and quite, quite false. I replied to the email, told her it was false and gave her the link to the Snopes page with the info.

I have noticed that I get these forwarded by my friends who are AOL users. I can't recall an instance of one coming from anyone else. I have never used AOL as a service provider so I don't know if there is something in particular about their environment that somehow makes them more prone to passing of this nonsense without checking the veracity of it or if it just the type of person who chooses AOL that makes them more prone to it or if I am just seeing a pattern that is not there.

Anyone else have any experience of this?

I have always replied with Snopes links and even suggested that they check Snopes before forwarding to all and sundry, but it does not seem to work.

I would not mind so much, but they invariably also forward emails with every single email header from every previous person in the line with all email address intact and I know my email address is getting spread further and further to all sorts of places as a part of this nonsense.

[This Guy]

I thought AOL users were Urban Legends ;)

[Hamradioguy]

Some but not all urban legend type e-mails I've received have indeed come from AOL users. Just a guess, with no proof, that a fair proportion of AOL users are either younger types and/or relatively new to the Internet. The very type that is prone to get suckered into passing along these stories to their new e-mail buddies. Anyone have hard data on this idea?

[exarch]

Today I received another Urban Legend email from one of my friends. This one was about hotel keycards as a way for people to steal your identity.I would not mind so much, but they invariably also forward emails with every single email header from every previous person in the line with all email address intact and I know my email address is getting spread further and further to all sorts of places as a part of this nonsense.

Oh, the irony ...

[Gr8wight]

Some but not all urban legend type e-mails I've received have indeed come from AOL users. Just a guess, with no proof, that a fair proportion of AOL users are either younger types and/or relatively new to the Internet. The very type that is prone to get suckered into passing along these stories to their new e-mail buddies. Anyone have hard data on this idea?

No hard data, but as an AOL user myself, I can give you my firm opinion that your speculation is correct. There are several factors.

1) AOL saturates the market with those "FREE AOL" CDs (or at least they used to - AOL really is free now if you have other access), and is very commonly a new computer user's first exposure to the Internet.

2) Because of its proprietary and exclusionary environment (this is in the process of changing as well, but slowly), AOL users tend to stay AOL users, with little or no contact with the greater WWW.

3) Because of its excellent built in parental controls, it is the system of choice for many people with children.

4) Because of its simplicity of use, it is the system of choice for many computer neophytes.

My experience on AOL is that it is overrun with teens and bored housewives. Hence the abundance of those kinds of forwarded emails. Whenever I get one, I do the same as was described above. I look up the facts on Snopes.com, click 'reply all' and send the info and link, not only to the person who sent me the message, but also to every other person he or she sent it to.

I am unpopular in some corners of the AOL community.

:p

[Kochanski]

Oh, the irony ...

Yes, I know. And try as I might to teach them to excise every previous email from things they forward, it has not worked. Even getting them to send stuff bcc when they are sending to multiple people has not worked.

[Elizabeth I]

My cousin-in-law will forward ANYTHING, and I do mean anything. However, she is as far as I know not an AOL user and I have always put it down to her living in California. :D

[Kochanski]

My friends are not neophytes, they are not kids and they are reasonably savvy about many things on the internet. They all do things outside the AOL community and go to lots of other places on the internet. So I am somewhat at a loss when it comes to the guillibility of my friends on this.

[Gr8wight]

My friends are not neophytes, they are not kids and they are reasonably savvy about many things on the internet. They all do things outside the AOL community and go to lots of other places on the internet. So I am somewhat at a loss when it comes to the guillibility of my friends on this.

Bad news, chum. Your friends are morons. ;-)

Sorry, there I go making myself unpopular again. Actually, I suspect there's a lot of auto-pilot to the whole thing. They may simply forward these things on to everyone in their address book because "that's what you do." I have often got replies from people apologising for forwarding untrue urban legends, and promising to check Snopes first from now on, but sure enough, a few days later, there's their screen name in my inbox again, warning me about the latest virus that's going to burn a hole in my hard drive. If I complain enough, they stop sending them, but I suspect they simply take my name out of their address book, and keep on keepin' on without me. Which, truth be told, suits me just fine. I rarely sign on and have to sort through 50-60 garbage e-mails.

[The Atheist]

My friends are not neophytes, they are not kids and they are reasonably savvy about many things on the internet. They all do things outside the AOL community and go to lots of other places on the internet. So I am somewhat at a loss when it comes to the guillibility of my friends on this.Hear, hear.

I find that some otherwise totally reasonable people get suckered in to internet scams. Must be some kind of mesmerising effect like the slot-machine manufacturers use.

Can't say more now, I won not one, not two, but THREE 2 million Euro lotteries today and I have to e mail my claim! (If I can get ten of you to send in confirmation e mails, I'll get an extra TEN million Euros! So, anyone wanting a share, please PM me your e mail address so I can forward it to some people who will make your life hell with spam make you millions!

[exarch]

My experience on AOL is that it is overrun with teens and bored housewives. Hence the abundance of those kinds of forwarded emails. Whenever I get one, I do the same as was described above. I look up the facts on Snopes.com, click 'reply all' and send the info and link, not only to the person who sent me the message, but also to every other person he or she sent it to.

I am unpopular in some corners of the AOL community.

I tried that once. Unfortunately, I'd forgotten the little Outlook setting that automatically saves every e-mail address you reply to in your address book.

For over two years now, I've had about 40 email contacts in my address book that are someone else's friends/acquaintances, but just by name alone I can't really tell which is which, apart from maybe two dozen or so really obvious ones that I deleted right away.

[Admiral]

My grandfather (AOL user) has a Ph.d in Physical Chemistry and forty years of experience working as a scientist. However, he still forwarded me an email last July explaining how that night, Mars was going to be closer than it had been in millenia.

I did the thirty seconds of research needed to prove the claim bogus (Mars was closest in summer 2003 than it will be for a while), and showed some simple physics to show why the email's arguments were ridiculous (it suggested that the closeness was due to the influence that Jupiter's orbit has on Mars- generally bogus stuff). He immediately understood, but I'm not sure he got the larger message, which is that you can't trust anything a forwarded email says.

It's not an issue of people being dumb or clueless about science- it's an example of people not understanding the internet. He assumed that the forwarded email was accurate in, well, the same way people assume that AOL is the best way to browse the internet.

So don't rag on the AOL users- think about how well you'll understand technology half a century from now.

[Elizabeth I]

My grandfather (AOL user) has a Ph.d in Physical Chemistry and forty years of experience working as a scientist. However, he still forwarded me an email last July explaining how that night, Mars was going to be closer than it had been in millenia.

I did the thirty seconds of research needed to prove the claim bogus (Mars was closest in summer 2003 than it will be for a while), and showed some simple physics to show why the email's arguments were ridiculous (it suggested that the closeness was due to the influence that Jupiter's orbit has on Mars- generally bogus stuff). He immediately understood, but I'm not sure he got the larger message, which is that you can't trust anything a forwarded email says.

It's not an issue of people being dumb or clueless about science- it's an example of people not understanding the internet. He assumed that the forwarded email was accurate in, well, the same way people assume that AOL is the best way to browse the internet.

So don't rag on the AOL users- think about how well you'll understand technology half a century from now.
No intent to insult Admiral's grandfather, but this brings up a broader question - how and why would an intelligent, educated person think something is true just because it was forwarded? If the same person had walked up to the grandfather and SAID, "Mars will be closer to the earth tonight than it has ever been," would the grandfather have believed him?

Is it because the Internet by its nature is largely written (although that's changing), rather than spoken? An extension of the "if it's in print, then it must be true" thing?

[BPSCG]

Today I received another Urban Legend email from one of my friends. This one was about hotel keycards as a way for people to steal your identity. It sounded fishy to me immediately, so off I went to Snopes and within 30 seconds I had confirmed that it was indeed an UL and quite, quite false. I replied to the email, told her it was false and gave her the link to the Snopes page with the info.

I have noticed that I get these forwarded by my friends who are AOL users. I can't recall an instance of one coming from anyone else. I have never used AOL as a service provider so I don't know if there is something in particular about their environment that somehow makes them more prone to passing of this nonsense without checking the veracity of it or if it just the type of person who chooses AOL that makes them more prone to it or if I am just seeing a pattern that is not there.

Anyone else have any experience of this?

I have always replied with Snopes links and even suggested that they check Snopes before forwarding to all and sundry, but it does not seem to work.

I would not mind so much, but they invariably also forward emails with every single email header from every previous person in the line with all email address intact and I know my email address is getting spread further and further to all sorts of places as a part of this nonsense.You just described my mother to a T, except that she doesn't use AOL.

I've been banging my head on the desk for years to try to get her to at least send her latest UL just to me, so I can fact-check it, before emailbombing her entire mailing list.

Last one she sent (and she sent it to all her friends, too), I recognized it as a hoax even before going to Snopes or About.com, and emailed her back: "Mom, did you even check to see if this was true before mailing it out?"

Answer: "I figured you would do it for me!"

:hb:

I love my mother, but sometimes I want to take her computer away from her.

[Lisa Simpson]

My mother-in-law (a former AOL user) sends me every glurge and urban legend that crosses her inbox. Unfortunately, so does one of my sisters-in-law (not an AOL user). So I get double, double, DOUBLE the stupidity. Plus, my sis-in-law is very fond of sending me religious glurges. Like this one (http://www.snopes.com/glurge/rapestop.asp), for example.

[tkingdoll]

Many people get really angry when you reply with a link showing their email is an UM. I stopped concluding with the line "don't believe everything you read on the internet" when I started including a link to Snopes (which somewhat made a mockery of my point), but even so, people don't want to be corrected, shown to be wrong, made to look foolish, patronised (as they see it) or in any way rebutted.

They want to be popular and accepted, and the forwarding of UMs, particularly those regarding scams, is part of a 'look at the favour I'm doing for you all, I could be saving your life/bank account here!' - it's done out of kindness so the debunking is basically a slap in the face of what's considered to be a favour. Also, there is a huge element of 'better safe than sorry' - the logic being that even if the email is an UM, there might be some truth in it and therefore worth forwarding.

But mainly it's that no-one likes a smartass. By debunking, you are saying you are smarter and more resourceful than they, and that they are gullible, lazy and stupid.

My experience is that the more you debunk, the less likely you are to receive the email, but that's only because the person stops including you in their mass spam.

But I still debunk the ones I get. A really good point to make in your replies is that UM emails are a form of virus, in that they are designed to clog up people's email system by mass forwarding, and every email sent and received has a cost for the user or company in internet resources, bandwidth etc.

The ones that really, really baffle me are the greedy idiots who forward those 'send this to 20 people and Microsoft will send you a bottle of champagne!' - it just doesn't enter their minds to question how the hell Microsoft or whoever would possibly know who you are from your email address, and how the hell they are magically tracking the email as it gets forwarded.

[JonnyFive]

Like this one (http://www.snopes.com/glurge/rapestop.asp), for example.

Wow. Just wow.

That's a horrible story. The angels couldn't even stop the rape, they just passed it on to the next person?

[Kaylee]

Wouldn’t it be nice if the side effect of all these e-mailed urban legends, Nigerian scams, and ID theft attempts (phishing) would be to create a new widespread attitude of critical thinking?

Imagine all the e-mail users thinking clearly … apologies to John Lennon. ;)

[JonnyFive]

Wouldn’t it be nice if the side effect of all these e-mailed urban legends, Nigerian scams, and ID theft attempts (phishing) would be to create a new widespread attitude of critical thinking?

Sure, that would be great. We can talk about it after I contact Mr. Nguyabi about the 21 trillion dollars he wants me to help him move out of his country before the government can seize it.

[Lisa Simpson]

Many people get really angry when you reply with a link showing their email is an UM. I stopped concluding with the line "don't believe everything you read on the internet" when I started including a link to Snopes (which somewhat made a mockery of my point), but even so, people don't want to be corrected, shown to be wrong, made to look foolish, patronised (as they see it) or in any way rebutted.


I find this very true, too. The one exception was my uncle, who thanked me for showing him Snopes.

[Kochanski]

Usually I get no reply at all when I reply with the results of my Snopes check. I always include the link hoping that they will get the hint that this is something that they can do themselves when they receive one of these stories, rather than just automatically forwarding it on to all on their list.

I am sure they are not happy that I am pointing out that they were wrong. I don't usually send the reply to all that they sent the UL to, that would embarass them. I will send it on to the people I know on the email so they are aware that the story is false, though.

I keep hoping that eventually it will sink in that they can actually check these things out before they send the "panic" on to others.

[Deus Ex Machina]

Today I received another Urban Legend email from one of my friends. This one was about hotel keycards as a way for people to steal your identity. It sounded fishy to me immediately, so off I went to Snopes and within 30 seconds I had confirmed that it was indeed an UL and quite, quite false. I replied to the email, told her it was false and gave her the link to the Snopes page with the info.

I have noticed that I get these forwarded by my friends who are AOL users. I can't recall an instance of one coming from anyone else. I have never used AOL as a service provider so I don't know if there is something in particular about their environment that somehow makes them more prone to passing of this nonsense without checking the veracity of it or if it just the type of person who chooses AOL that makes them more prone to it or if I am just seeing a pattern that is not there.

I have a couple of these pests as well and, funnily enough, neither are AOL users. I do think there is a personality "type" involved here which probably does favor the AOL user profile. They tend to just accept any old crap that is thrown at them, they never change their pattern of behavior and they are only capable of credulity and not capable of curiosity.

That sort of user was AOL's bread and butter for a very long time.

[Baron Samedi]

I'll have to agree with tkingdoll. I used to receive an awful lot of these "hey isn't this neat?" emails from people, especially at work, and would try to reply nicely at times. For example, the first few times I received the "forward this email to 50 people and Bill Gates personally will send you $100!" email, I replied back, "I don't think this is true according to snopes, but let me know if it works for you." I never received an answer if it did work. (What a shock)

The one that really got to me was this autumn, and being told (yet again) that Mars will be the closest to Earth that its ever been blah blah blah. I have a very soft spot for astronomy, so I replied-all with the link to snopes and to Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy site. I thought I got the point across, until I overheard two people talking in the office:

"Did you see Mars last night?"
"Oh my god, it was gorgeous! Did you see it?"
"It was stunning!"

I rarely get these emails from coworkers any more, but judging from that conversation, I would guess it's because people see me as too much of a party-pooper. People like their little OMG! stories, and don't bother to see if it's true.

[Kochanski]

I rarely get these emails from coworkers any more, but judging from that conversation, I would guess it's because people see me as too much of a party-pooper. People like their little OMG! stories, and don't bother to see if it's true.

Yes, the power of gossip. No one ever really cares if it is true, they just enjoy spreading it.

Hhhhm, now I am wondering, have there been any studies on gossip? What drives it? Why we participate even when we suspect it is untrue?

[Baron Samedi]

Yes, the power of gossip. No one ever really cares if it is true, they just enjoy spreading it.

Hhhhm, now I am wondering, have there been any studies on gossip? What drives it? Why we participate even when we suspect it is untrue?

Well, from what they say, it all stems from a desire to gain attention due to mother issues in your childhood. ;)

In all seriousness, that is an interesting question if and who has done studies on this. We as humans are curious creatures, and we love to send and receive information. Why we would pass on information that we aren't sure is true, or even highly suspect to be untrue and yet tell it anyway as if it was true, that's the big question.

But isn't this the underlying theme at the JREF?

[Ladewig]

Many people get really angry when you reply with a link showing their email is an UM.
[snip]
They want to be popular and accepted, and the forwarding of UMs, particularly those regarding scams, is part of a 'look at the favour I'm doing for you all, I could be saving your life/bank account here!' - it's done out of kindness so the debunking is basically a slap in the face of what's considered to be a favour. Also, there is a huge element of 'better safe than sorry' - the logic being that even if the email is an UM, there might be some truth in it and therefore worth forwarding.


What are UMs?

[tkingdoll]

What are UMs?

Urban Myth. I just realised I'd used that instead of 'legend', myth is the normal saying the UK.

[BillC]

Dear AOL users

If you simply must forward me chain letters 'that can't be broken', 'totally true' urban legends, and petitions for me to sign against bills that have never been proposed, then at least strip off some of the hundred layers of circulation lists first, so I don't have to wade through all this crap before finding out what it is in your e-mail I have to ignore.

Thank you.

[BillC]

OK, I see Kochanski has said as much in the last paragraph of her OP.

[treble_head]

send your pests to me. My ex girlfriend used to send me lists of "facts" and annecdotes and ULs, but has stopped. I need my fix. I like debunking them, even if I don't send them back. I love fact checking and such, so if you have some particularly good ULs or "fact" lists, forward them to me at treble_head@yahoo.com

[Kochanski]

Dear AOL users

If you simply must forward me chain letters 'that can't be broken', 'totally true' urban legends, and petitions for me to sign against bills that have never been proposed, then at least strip off some of the hundred layers of circulation lists first, so I don't have to wade through all this crap before finding out what it is in your e-mail I have to ignore.

Thank you.

But I like the way you put it. I think I need to save this as a form letter in Eudora :D

[BillC]

The thing is, much of it simply doesn't need debunking, or at least presents no challenge at all. I was forwarded a petition asking me to add my name to a list of people opposed to Madeline Murray O'Hare's (note spelling) proposal to get all TV programs that mentioned 'God' off the air. It didn't seem to matter to the signers that O'Hair had been dead for ten years, and even when alive had proposed no such measure.

[Lisa Simpson]

She's an evil atheist. I'm sure she's trying to God off the air from beyond the grave.

[luchog]

Oh the joys of Eternal September.

I used to get a lot of this kind of crap, but sending Snopes links every time pretty much ended that after a while. People got tired of me making them look like the idiots they were, I guess. Fortunately, few of them were people I'd consider friends, and the few that were grew up and got off of AOL.

AOL is the spawn of satan, a truly evil being that even the Great Old Ones fear. It's so easy and "idiot proof" that, of course, lots of idiots will use it. Back in the day, technical knowledge and skill was a bright dividing line between those who were intelligent enough to get online, and those who had trouble tying their shoes without help. Then along comes QuantumLink with the simplified networking; morphs into AOL and does the "dumbed down so far it makes developmentally disabled preschoolers look lik geniuses by comparison" and a world of morons gets connected. Fortunately, they were still an insular little world, completely seperate from the Great Experiement that was the Internet. They began to offer some Internet access, but it was limited and expensive. Still, it was the beginning of the end.

Then the unthinkable happened. AOL began offereing unlimited, free Internet access on top of their regular network. It became the first day of September, forever. Now, instead of being limited to it's own little cesspool, the sewage began to innundate the net. Before long, other services began touting their own "Simple enough for brain-damanged mongolids" services; and soon the entire net was eyeball-deep in untreated human wastes.

Then began the ascendency of the World Wide Web. The intelligence barrier had not merely been lowered, it had been removed entirely. Now everyone, everywhere, could have the same brainless, "even your dog can do it" access to the entirety of the Internet, through various web gateways, such as Google Groups; while creating entirely new platrorms for the weak-minded and vociferious to proclaim their self-important worthlessness. Gullible idiots were soon overwhelmed with many different contradictory lies to believe; and, unfortunately, managed to do so without their brains exploding. Not only is intelligence no longer a requirement, it's actually a hindrance in experiencing the 'Net in it's fullness. A whole generation has grown up with Internet access from the cradle, in an environment that strongly discourages the development of archaic, outmoded concepts such as "proper spelling and grammar", "effective communication skills", "common courtesy", "rational discourse", and "critical thinking".

And we're still waiting for October to happen.

[Beady]

I think you want the Conspiracy Theory forum. It's over there; just look for the tinfoil hats.

[valis]

4) Because of its simplicity of use, it is the system of choice for many computer neophytes.

My experience on AOL is that it is overrun with teens and bored housewives.

:p

I have the following customer conversation at least once per week:

Me: "What version of Windows are you using?"

Customer: "I don't use Windows I have AOL".

[exarch]

My experience is that the more you debunk, the less likely you are to receive the email, but that's only because the person stops including you in their mass spam.

At the company I was a network administrator at, we eventually ended up including virus-hoaxes in the procedures. People were no longer allowed to forward any type of email hoax to their entire address book unless we'd cleared it first. Our official story was that we didn't want other companies being able to hold us responsible if one of their employees messed up their computer because a virus hoax sent by one of our employees told them to, but we really wanted people to not send any more spam around.

Either most people stopped cluing us in and still forwarded it all, or the company really didn't receive that many hoaxes after all. Either way, most of the stuff we got were emails that had been floating around cyberspace for over a decade, like the "Budweiser frogs" thing for example.

[Marc L]

Is it because the Internet by its nature is largely written (although that's changing), rather than spoken? An extension of the "if it's in print, then it must be true" thing?

Possibly. I think it also has to do with "Why would they say it if it wasn't true?"

As for the using snopes to debunk Urban Legends. I did that all through the last deployment this past spring, as well as the one I was on before that. Finally, about 4 months into this past deployment, one of my (theist) friends snapped at me in frustration: "Just because it's on snopes, doesn't mean it's true! You have too much faith in that site!"

:rolleyes:

Marc

[exarch]

Finally, about 4 months into this past deployment, one of my (theist) friends snapped at me in frustration: "Just because it's on snopes, doesn't mean it's true! You have too much faith in that site!"

:rolleyes:

A point the people at snopes tend to make themselves.

But to paraphrase Captain Kirk, I'd rather trust Snopes' hunches than many other people's certainties.

[ChristineR]

A lot of times when I question people on these they admit that they didn't really believe that hotel key cards could be used to steal your identity (for example), they just thought it sounded plausible enough to be possible, and they figured we all need reminding to be cautious.

:boggled:

[switchtech]

So don't rag on the AOL users- think about how well you'll understand technology half a century from now.

I had a odd experience today - related in a distant way to your message. While at Best Buy getting a new battery for my camcorder, I wandered through the Music section. Looking at the names of the artists in the Rock section I had the sudden realization that I'm not part of the generation that listens to current Rock music (I didn't recognize half the artists!). I'm getting old... ;)

Since I participate in technology as a hobby and as part of my employment, I hope I'm still capable of dealing with it in a few decades! However, I recognize that at some point other priorities may take over and I will no longer keep current - and I'll be come an AOL user! :jaw-dropp

jbs

[Hamradioguy]

An extension of the "if it's in print, then it must be true" thing?

That's sort of "The Voice of Authority" idea. First it was radio (As in the "War of the Worlds" broadcast.) Then TV (As in all those obnoxious ads that attempt to show credibility by adding "As seen on TV"). More recently the e-mails we are talking about ("Hey, my buddy sent this e-mail to me, so it must be true.") And now we have the tin foil hat crowd of CTers whose evidence is something they found on Youtube. Internet resources aside, it still takes a bit of effort and critical thinking skills to examine far out claims.

[luchog]

A point the people at snopes tend to make themselves.

But to paraphrase Captain Kirk, I'd rather trust Snopes' hunches than many other people's certainties.

I have caught Snopes on a couple of errors, one fairly egregious. Don't know if it's been corrected since then or not. But overall I've found them to be very reliable.

[luchog]

Looking at the names of the artists in the Rock section I had the sudden realization that I'm not part of the generation that listens to current Rock music (I didn't recognize half the artists!). I'm getting old... ;)

I tend to keep up with anything that is interesting and well done. For the most part, there is very little in current mainstream rock that is either one, let alone both. Not that I'm claiming "music was better in my day", because I can remember a whole lot of crap from my childhood as well. But musical trends do to in cycles, and there will be peaks and valleys in the availability of really good music. Right now we're in a valley, with all the lame, talentless, cookie-cutter hip-hop, nu-metal, pop-industrial, corp-rock "alterna", and so on. Same sort of valley that preceeded the birth of Punk/New Wave and Grunge. It's generally related to the control of the music industry by big conglomerates and their refusal to releaase anything outside of the same trite formula. It's generally followed shortly by an explosion of indie labels and "underground" bands (like Stiff Records in the '70s, SubPop in the '80s) I expect they'll be another major shakeup before much longer. It's pretty much already starting, but through self-publishing and Internet distribution. The death of MP3.com set it back a few years, but it's still chugging right along.

Since I participate in technology as a hobby and as part of my employment, I hope I'm still capable of dealing with it in a few decades! However, I recognize that at some point other priorities may take over and I will no longer keep current - and I'll be come an AOL user!
The main thing that seperates the stereotypical idiot AOL user from those who have a clue has nothing to do with age, or necessarily even native intelligence. It is simply the willingness to learn. During the years I did tech support I encountered plenty of idiot lusers, AOL and otherwise, young and old. I also encountered a number of older users who actually had a clue what they were doing, and weren't complete 'tards when it came to technology. It really has nothing to do with age. Hell, my dad never touched a computer in his life until his 50s, then after getting laid off (from Boeing), he spent the next couple years going back to school, and ended up with an MCSE. Have another friend, now in his 50s, who has been a technophile all his life. He's a moderately well-known local nature photographer, and has always embraced new photographic technology, and has kept up with the "digital revolution" (though not become a gadget-head, fortunately), and tends to use a mix of old and new technology, depending on what he's doing.

One caller I was attempting to help with a technical issue stated in one quite clear and succinct phrase exactly what was wrong with her and nearly everyone else like her I've ever had to deal with: "I don't want to learn about this stuff, I just want it to do what I need it to do". An exact quote that has stuck in my head ever since. There's a certain conservative mindset that thinks that the level of education and technology that they experienced as a young adult is all they will ever need to know for the rest of their life. So not only do they not bother to seek out any further education, but they actively resist learning anything new. "I've been this way all my life, and I'm not gonna change now."

This is why we have polititians and citizens' groups trying to dumb the entire 'Net down to a primary-school level. It's easier to legislate against "obscenity" than it is to learn how the technology works, to use it effectively, and to monitor their own childrens' use of it.

And it's not like skeptics are immune to that sort of fossilization of thinking. It's just a short step from skeptic to crank, as certain individuals here have ably demonstrated.

[ObscureReferenceMan]

My experience is that the more you debunk, the less likely you are to receive the email, but that's only because the person stops including you in their mass spam.

Very true! I think these people tend to see your response as a negative - and respond in kind by removing you from the list. But I suppose it's win-win.

[CynicalSkeptic]

I have caught Snopes on a couple of errors, one fairly egregious. Don't know if it's been corrected since then or not. But overall I've found them to be very reliable.

It wasn't from The Repository Of Lost Legends (TROLL (http://www.snopes.com/lost/lost.htm)) was it?

[Psi Baba]

I usually try to include two or three references, not just Snopes. I usually check urbanlegends.about.com and tafkac.org, the Webified collection of material from alt.folklore.urban.

[exarch]

:jaw-dropp

I got one from a JREF skeptic today !!

:jaw-dropp

It was a myspace bulletin about a California legislative proposal to exterminate all pitbulls.
It took me all of 10 seconds to type out the web-address for snopes and type in "pitbull" as the search term and lo and behold, the first result returned (http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/pitbull.asp) was the entry clearly exposing that particular story as a myth. And if I understand correctly, the proposal was in fact already approved and signed into law well over a year ago, to boot.

Some things just sound too far fetched right from the start, and yet, if they hit the right heartstring, apparently all rationality is lost ...

Edit:
I have to add, in all fairness, that the page says it was last updated two days ago, which means it might not have been created until two days ago, meaning the aforementioned JREF-skeptic might actually have checked snopes and not found anything.

[Cuddles]

The main thing that seperates the stereotypical idiot AOL user from those who have a clue has nothing to do with age, or necessarily even native intelligence. It is simply the willingness to learn.

I'm not sure even this is the whole story, there seems to be a large proportion of people that just cannot seem to grasp how to learn how to use a computer. My parents are a great example. They are not stupid by any standards, they both use computers a lot and my father has owned one pretty much since home computers existed. And yet they are both somehow completely incapable, no matter how much I teach them or how much they read, of actually learning how a computer works, or that Word is not the same as Windows or that the interweb is not some big magical thing that eats you if you press the wrong button. The things is, if they need to learn a specific task they are fine, and I'm sure they can do spreadsheets way better than I will ever be able.

The problem seems to be that evey new thing is treated as an entirely new thing, so even if it has exactly the same layout and menus, they still won't be able to use it until taught. No doubt there are many people who simply refuse to learn, but there seem to be an awful lot that either don't understand how to learn, or don't understand that a lot of the time there is nothing to learn. Switching from IE to Firefox makes no difference because all the buttons are in the same place and do the same thing, yet because it's orange and says Firefox on it, it is seen as something big and scary and takes weeks to learn.

[exarch]

Cuddles, I know what you mean.
I'll be trying to explain some program (say, Word for example) to a parent/cousin/computer-newb, and I barely just started and they go "whoawhao! Not so fast", and I'm thinking "What? I haven't even opened Word yet, I'm still browsing the menu ..."

And then they start writing down every button I clicked and which menu to find it in and such, and how often I clicked the icons, and so on and so forth.

It's around that point that I realize it's going to take much longer than a few minutes :(

Of course, it doesn't really help that most of those people speak hardly any English, and while their Windows might be a Dutch version, and maybe even their Office software might be Dutch, invariably there's some program that only comes with english menus, and they're completely lost again.

It's actually easier to let people who don't speak any English figure their way around an English environment (they'll know what "edit" and "save" means anyway), than to have them suddenly freeze when the menus are full of, as far as they can tell, computechnogobbledygook.

[luchog]

It wasn't from The Repository Of Lost Legends (TROLL (http://www.snopes.com/lost/lost.htm)) was it?

Nope, both errors were the regular pages. The more egregious one was, as I recall, one of those which is perpetually in dispute, with many people erroneously claiming it to be an urban legend, many people claiming an exaggerated and incorrect version is true. The only reason I knew it to be an error on Snopes part was because of personal knowledge. Unfortunately, this was years ago, and I can't remember what it was, so I can't check and see if they fixed it. I think it was in the technology section.

edited to add: looking through the site i found another minor error with Snopes. The Straight Dope, however, had the correct info.

[Gr8wight]

Dear AOL users

If you simply must forward me chain letters 'that can't be broken', 'totally true' urban legends, and petitions for me to sign against bills that have never been proposed, then at least strip off some of the hundred layers of circulation lists first, so I don't have to wade through all this crap before finding out what it is in your e-mail I have to ignore.

Thank you.

Problem is, we AOL users don't actually see all that information. The AOL mail software hides the headers. All we can see is headers from previous non-AOL forwards than have become part of the text of the e-mail. If it is something that has been internal for a while, there might be several layers of headers included that we never know are there.

[RSLancastr]

My sister sent around one of those lists of "amazing true facts," at least a third of which were patently false.

I did a Reply All stating this, adding Snopes links to back it up.

My sister then did a Reply All, saying "Robert, I knew most of it was probably not true, but it was still fun!"

:confused:

To paraphrase HHGTTG: Obviously, this is some definition of the word "fun" with which I am not familiar.

[BPSCG]

"Just because it's on snopes, doesn't mean it's true! You have too much faith in that site!""So I should be more like you, and put my faith in total strangers?"

[a.real.girl]

I have trouble tolerating the "better safe than sorry" methodology, especially from folks who know me well.

Most of the time I can be patient, but whenever it's some BS about a woman at the mall, who parked far away in the dark, etc., etc.... my eyes start to roll back into my head.

[exarch]

Most of the time I can be patient, but whenever it's some BS about a woman at the mall, who parked far away in the dark, etc., etc.... my eyes start to roll back into my head.

Yeah, after a while, you sort of get a good idea about a story's odds of being true just from the way it sounds.

[BPSCG]

Okay, my mom forwarded this to me yesterday. Sorry about the punctuation; that's the way she got it.

To All My Friends Who Have Barraged Me with e-mails,
Thought I Would Show My Appreciation With A Big Thanks:

To Whoever Sent Me the One about Rat crap in the glue on envelopes because I Now Have To Use A Wet Towel with Every Envelope That Needs Sealing -- Also, I Now Have To Scrub the Top of Every Can I open For the Same Reason

I No Longer Have Any Savings Because I Gave It To A Sick Girl (Penny Brown) Who Is About To Die In The Hospital For The 1,387,258th Time But That Will Change Once I Receive The $15,000 That Bill Gates/Microsoft And AOL Are Sending Me For Participating In Their Special E-mail Program.

I No Longer Worry About My Soul Because I Have 363,214 Angels Looking Out For Me, And St. Theresa's Novena Has Granted My Every Wish.

I No Longer Eat KFC Because Their Chickens Are Actually Horrible Mutant Freaks With No Eyes Or Feathers. As Soon As I Get My Free Dinner Coupons From Applebee's, I Can Eat Again.

I No Longer Use Cancer-Causing Deodorants Even Though I Smell Like A Water Buffalo On A Hot Day.

Thanks To You, I've Learned That My Prayers Only Get Answered If I Forward An Email To 7 Of My Friends And Make A Wish Within 5 Minutes.

Because Of Your Concern I No Longer Drink Coca Cola Because It Can Remove Toilet Stains.

I No Longer Can Buy Gasoline Without Taking A Man Along To Watch The Car So A Serial Killer Won't Crawl In My Back Seat When I'm Pumping Gas.

I No Longer Drink Pepsi Or Dr. Pepper Since The People Who Make These Products Are Atheists Who Refuse To Put "Under God" On Their Cans.

I No Longer Use Saran Wrap In The Microwave Because It Causes Cancer.

And Thanks For Letting Me Know I Can't Boil A Cup of Water In The Microwave Anymore Because It Will Blow Up In My Face..Disfiguring Me For Life.

I No Longer Check The Coin Return On Pay Phones Because I Could Be Pricked With A Needle Infected With AIDS.

I No Longer Go To Shopping Malls Because Someone Will Drug Me With a Perfume Sample And Rob Me.

I No Longer Receive Packages From UPS Or Fedex Since They Are Actually Al Qaeda In Disguise.

I No Longer Shop At Target Since They Are French And Don't Support Our American Troops Or The Salvation Army.

I No Longer Answer the Phone Because Someone Will Ask Me To Dial A Number For Which I Will Get A Phone Bill Totaling $2,374.76 With Calls To Jamaica , Uganda , Singapore , And Uzbekistan.

I No Longer Have Any Sneakers -- But That Will Change Once I Receive My Free Replacement Pair From Nike.

I No Longer Buy Expensive Cookies From Neiman Marcus Since I Now Have Their Recipe.

And Thanks To Your Great Advice, I Can't Ever Pick Up $5.00 Dropped In The Parking Lot Because It Probably Was Placed There By A Sex Molester Waiting Underneath My Car To Grab My Leg.

Oh, And Don't Forget This One Either!
I Can No Longer Drive My Car Because I Can't Buy Gas From Certain Gas Companies!

Thanks To You, I Can't Use Anyone's Toilet But Mine Because A Big Brown African Spider Is Lurking Under The Seat To Cause Me Instant Death When It Bites My Ass.

And Remember, If You Don't Send This E-mail To At Least 144,000 People In The Next 7 Minutes, A Large Dove With Diarrhea Will Land On Your Head At 5:00 PM This Afternoon And The Fleas From 12 Camels Will Infest Your Back, Causing You To Grow A Hairy Hump.

I Know This Will Occur Because It Actually Happened To A Friend Of My Next Door Neighbor's Ex-Mother-In-law's Second Husband's Cousin's Beautician ...

Have A Wonderful Day....

One Last Bit Of Noteworthy News:

A South American Scientist From Argentina , After A Lengthy Study, Has Discovered That People With Insufficient Brain And Sexual Activity Read Their E-mail With Their Hand On The Mouse.

Don't Bother Taking It Off Now, It's Too Late

[ChristineR]

The microwave one is actually true. Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/science/microwave.asp) It usually happens when the cup is still in the microwave though, and I'm sure you should worry more about spillage than explosions.

[tsg]

If there is a higher proportion of hoax email forwarders on AOL, it is likely due to AOL's marketing to the less-than-technically-savvy. Before it went belly-up, WebTV was the main offender. Before that it was universities in September.

I generally give three hints. The first occurrence gets a list of links to articles debunking the hoax. The second gets the google search I used to find the list of articles debunking the hoax. The third gets the second hint forwarded to everyone he sent it to as well. I rarely have to go past three.

In a few cases the first hint is sufficient. The best result was from an otherwise critical thinker who slipped up, but in his defense, it was the Mars email that was not really a hoax, just three years late. Most times the person stops sending me any email whatsoever. But in 99% of those, the hoaxes and joke-of-the-day emails were all I was getting from them anyway, so no real loss.

The one I will never forget, though, was the business contact who put me on his joke-of-the-day list (his entire address book). Because he was a client I just ignored them. During a phone conversation one day he asked me how I liked the jokes he was sending me. I said, "Honestly, and only because you asked, I'd prefer not to get them. I get so much email that I don't really have time for them and I've seen them all anyway." "Oh." he replied, obviously dissapointed that I didn't think he was a comedic genius for being able to find the forward button. Months later I get the "we sent you jokes because we were thinking about you" excuse letter. No you weren't. You forwarded it to everyone in your list. I'll bet you don't even remember who half the people are that you sent it to. There is nothing personal about it. Just like this form letter excuse that you didn't write and forwarded to everybody who told you to stop sending them jokes.

[tsg]

The microwave one is actually true. Snopes (http://www.snopes.com/science/microwave.asp) It usually happens when the cup is still in the microwave though, and I'm sure you should worry more about spillage than explosions.

Mythbusters did this one as well. It can happen but not often enough to warrant never boiling water in a microwave.

[exarch]

Mythbusters did this one as well. It can happen but not often enough to warrant never boiling water in a microwave.

Indeed. It can happen, but the conditions needed to create superheated water are very narrow (in other words, very pure water, a very clean glass, etc...).
Of course, you could simply use a water heater instead of the microwave, or not do anything stupid like throwing a spoon or something into the glass right after you've opened the microwave door.

[vIQleS]

If you want to make sure the water superheats you need to boil it twice in the same container:

http://amasci.com/weird/microwave/voltage2.html

Even more dangerous is to boil water TWICE in a microwave oven. Most containers have tiny scratches in their surfaces, and these crevices contain air. When you heat water, these tiny air pockets will provide a constant stream of "seed bubbles" which allow normal boiling to occur. However, the air in these tiny bubbles within the cracks quickly gets replaced by steam. The crevices still produce seed-bubbles, but if you turn off the oven and let the water cool, the steam in the cracks will collapse and vanish, and the crevices fill with water. The seed bubbles are gone. If you now turn the oven on again, the water will superheat.

[ZirconBlue]

Wow. Just wow.

That's a horrible story. The angels couldn't even stop the rape, they just passed it on to the next person?


That person wasn't a Christian, so it's OK.

[Strife]

I was really happy the day someone showed me Snopes. I began replying with Snopes links to everyone who sent me urban legends. They stopped. But instead they began to forward "funny" stories, pictures and power-point presentations. Now I have no ideas how to tell them I don't want their horrible forwards without insulting them..

[Marc L]

Check the glurge section of Snopes, and see if it's there. If it is, send them the link. Sooner or later, they'll realize you're just a killjoy, and stop sending you stuff. :)

Marc

[Mrs L]

I heard there was this wierd urban legend, all about this toddler who actually... lay down and took a nap without screaming and complaining...

I'm not sure if I believe this one or not. At any rate, the Borgmonkey is trying to convince me it's a myth. But then she fell asleep. And the evil person that I am, I accidentally woke her up.