Scam-baiting: Means justify the way?

LOL! That’s what we’re meant to do when they scam the scammer, right? At least, that’s what the tittering blogs imply we should be doing when they link to the latest protracted right-back-at-ya con on 419 Eater or its strutting ilk.

But no, and here’s why.

First, a précis of the joke: As anyone with an e-mail address will know, Nigerians – not exclusively Nigerians, but more often than not – frequently send out pigeon-English missives designed to sucker in and then con naïve and/or greedy westerners. Their e-mails, as you well know, are often pathos-drenched tales of how they’re dying of cancer and desperately need a reputable person to transfer a large sum of money to a certain account for a 10% cut etc.

The point of their uninvited solicitation is to convince you, one way or another, to send them money which they can quickly disappear with. The fraud, known technically as an ‘advance fee fraud’, has been more recently dubbed the ‘Nigerian letter’ or ‘419 Fraud’, named after the Nigerian criminal code it violates*.

Most of these e-mails are as clearly discernible as a nose on a face and moving them to the trash folder becomes a near-imperceptible daily irritation if your spam protection isn’t up to the job.

Nevertheless, a recent BBC report states: ‘Police estimate that every year, US citizens alone are conned out of some $200m.’ Likewise, horror stories such as this one demonstrate that even intelligent and usually sober minds can be taken in by the promise of easy money and a skilled story-telling fraudster.

In response to this injustice an internet subculture of westerners turning the tables on the scammers has surfaced – a practice known as ‘scam-baiting’. The scam-baiter replies to the initial e-mail pretending to be interested in the sender’s proposition. After the initial relationship has been struck up the game is to string along the scammer for as long as possible in an effort to waste their time or embarrass them publicly. This is achieved by requesting the Nigerian carry out and photograph increasingly ridiculous tasks and errands (such as posing with a humourous sign, getting a tattoo or, even making a wood-carving of a C64) with the promise of an eventual financial partnership – a direct turn of tables that transforms the original scammer into scam-ee.

Often scam-baiters (in stories such as this one) try to extort money from the prey to ’teach them a lesson’ or something. Scam-baiters usually then upload their stories to sites such as 419 Eater for the amusement of others. Some scam-baiters, such as Mike Berry, have even made their hobby into a vocation, relaying their tit-for-tat fraudulent exploits in print and, presumably, turning a joke into a profit.

So, what’s the problem?

Well, you know, discounting the fact that it’s actually not that funny seeing someone duped into losing their money – whoever they might be – two wrongs don’t make a right. What irritates me most about scam-baiters is that they commit the same acts of fraud as the original scammer intended to but seem to think they are ethically justified because they are simply turning the tables on a potential criminal.

Scam-baiters routinely (e.g. the vast majority of 419 eater’s stories follow this line) lie about the companies they run, make untrue claims about the nature of the work they do as well as promising to reimburse Nigerians for substantial costs incurred when carrying out their set tasks.

The only justification for all of this is that the other guy sent an e-mail which might have led to a similar sequence of events vice-versa. But to base fraud on pre-emptive tit-for-tat is hardly justification – ethically or legally.

And this is not an ethical dimension that has gone undetected by Mike Berry and his ilk.

419 Eater has its own page dedicated to justifying the ethics of what they’re doing. Except it does nothing of the sort. Rather it lists in nine easy to digest FAQ points why the original scammers are scum and need to be rebuked. It gives lots of handy links to sob stories of people who have been taken in by 419 scams losing their livelihoods and, occasionally, their lives. Finally, it attempts to answer the extraordinarily strange question: ‘Isn’t scambaiting/ this site racist?’

But the site’s not answering the important question. Any ethical concern is not based around whether these people are deserving of justice or punishment for their crimes. Nobody is denying that fraud and intention to commit fraud are crimes. Rather, the ethical criticism argues that this particular way of dealing with the crime is inappropriate; that tit-for-tat fraud has nothing to do with releasing justice- even if one of the benefits of this approach is to make people laugh and take fraudster’s time away from focusing upon real potential victims.

Indeed, the site and scam-baiting in general has less to do with justice than simply celebrating the art of the con. It’s as if suddenly conning people is acceptable if the subject was out to con you first and if you can do it in an entertaining or inventive way – a case of the means justifies the way.

The final paradox lies in the publishing deal. Every swindle is driven by a desire for easy money; it’s the one thing the swindler and the swindled have in common. Ironically, it’s also what the swindler of the swindler has in common as evidenced by Mike Berry ‘s best-selling book, Greetings in Jesus’ Name!, through which he makes money directly from his scamming the scammers. The sorry process has gone full circle and clearly demonstrates that, while eye-for-an-eye justice never solves anything, moneywill always make the scam go round.

*This style of confidence trick, according to Wikipedia, dates back to 1588 where letters were written claiming to be from a prisoner trapped in a Spanish castle. The fictitious prisoner would promise to share a treasure with a person who would send them money to bribe their guards.