It's simple. Use the victim's greed to circumvent his brain.

First, the perpetrator gets the victim to suspend his scepticism and dare to hope that the Too Good To Be True claim might actually be for real. Once you get him to start thinking it MIGHT be real, and to start thinking about how much he wants the thing that's on offer, you've got him. Now you can get him to invest time and effort into it, just a little bit at first... Once he starts to do that, he develops a vested emotional interest in the thing, at which point he's like the monkey with his hand in the jar who can't let go of the nuts to escape. You get him to invest a little more (in for a penny, in for a pound), and a little more, and pretty soon you have him for real money.

Ponzi scams, pyramics schemes, and advanced fee fraud (419 scams) all operate on this same principle, give or take a couple of details.

And there was me, just this moment installing Vista on my new PC - but maybe you're right, and everything I know is a lie!

Neat! Does this mean that we'll be seeing an article about your travails in selecting the components for your new computer soon?

I'm sure you're right about to tell us all how many millions of dollars Microsoft has put in a big sack for you to hand out to people, and what, if anything, Microsoft would like people to say in return for this money. Because, at the moment, it looks as if you're offering money to pretty much everyone with an Internet connection, but only actually intend to give that money to a few very specially selected people. Say it ain't so, Jerry!

(I would have thought you'd have been able to find a few bucks for a non-Hotmail e-mail address along the way, and thereby not make yourself look like some crazy guy pretending to have an actual job in the internationally-acclaimed field of public relations. But what do I know; apparently I'm a mindless echo-chamber Microsoft-hater who barely spared the time to post this between anti-Windows Slashdot comments! And there was me, just this moment installing Vista on my new PC - but maybe you're right, and everything I know is a lie! Perhaps I'm actually trapped in a solipsistic nightmare, my living brain floating in a jar in Richard Stallman's basement! Dear god!)

Anyway, Jerry, any time would be fine for you to explain how 95% of the people who have ever said something on the Web about OS features they'd like to see will qualify to make $100 in 20 minutes thanks to your amazing offer. Note that even if the only string you search for is "why can't Windows", you still get more than 30,000 hits.

But wait - there I go again, mindlessly echo-chambering my way to Google, the search engine that people use only because everybody says the Microsoft alternative is rubbish, not because Google actually works! Thank goodness you've set me right - off to Microsoft Chandler Bing I shall go and do the same search and- three hundred and seventy-three MILLION results?!

Holy crap, Jerry - you're right! Microsoft really IS better!

My head's in a spin, Jerry! I don't know what to think! For your offer to be honest, would you need many millions of dollars, or hundreds of billions of dollars, as Bing suggests? Microsoft - oh no, I said their name again; perhaps it's like the King In Yellow and any second now Steve Ballmer will erupt from my DSL connection and eat my very soul! - would seem to me, for your claim to be truthful, to need to create a new division of quite substantial size just to perform the vast number of video interviews in a timely fashion. If Bing's right, they'll need to suck up most of the US economic bailout, just to pay people to sit in front of a webcam. Are there that many webcams in the WORLD, Jerry? Take pity on us and let us know!

We're all eagerly awaiting your elucidation. Seriously.

As strange as it may seem to you, I suggest you try telling the truth.

Concealing the fact that Microsoft commissioned the survey is standard practice. Basic human psychology teaches us that knowing who is behind a survey will color our views. This is not controversial. Trying our best to be unbiased is never the same as being blissfully ignorant.

Dan, it appears that you wanted to divulge truth to the people. Traditionally, truth-telling types would use their journalistic talents to first discover more information and find the story before publishing. The place to start would be the source of the original information, in this case, me. Instead of asking me any questions, you chose to post my email here on "How to Spot a Psychopath." Of course, no new sounds emerge from an echo chamber.

Traditionally, a journalist would only publish the story without following up with one of the main characters if the seemingly-fishy person or company stonewalled or refused to reply.

I respect your freedom to do as you see fit and right and rather than question your integrity, I will assume that you probably really do wish to uncover the scams out there. I suggest you employ some of the keystone principles of journalism and steel yourself and your blog against what is known as the echo-chamber effect. This will only assist you in the battle you are waging. Every bit of success you achieve will be a benefit to all of us. Good luck with that.

Anyone interested in learning more about the echo-chamber can find lots of information out there, but here's one random link that discusses the problem: http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=856

All the best,

Jeremiah Pietroniro

I think that you'll see the videos of the surveys being included in some kind of ad. They'll have a 'Dan wants his computer to do X, so we made it happen' message.

I have no reason to think this, but It does seem like a sensible course of action. It could also justify the money being spent.

that could be incredibly valuable.

So the short version is: I've run lots of usability studies in the past, and apart from the weird/dodgy recruiting method it all sounds kosher.