5 ms·

Hm, I guess a lot can get lost in translation. :( That "olive branch" comment wasn't intended to be negative. I was saddened by his reply. To address your po

Hm, I guess a lot can get lost in translation. :( That "olive branch" comment wasn't intended to be negative. I was saddened by his reply. To address your point: I am not looking for a personal confrontation...just wanting to reach out and make sure he's OK.

neebz 15y ago
why are you saddened by his reply?
Udo 15y ago
I think the olive branch comment is consistent because it conveys an absolute lack of insight into the way your actions are perceived by other people. Sam, the things you wrote on your blog regarding the whole incident left me speechless at first. It wasn't just because of what you did, it was the tone of superiority and confidence you exhibited throughout that made me really angry - angry enough to attack you very harshly in the other thread. I'm not a confrontational person either by any means, but this actually made me mad enough to explode like that in public. I can only try to imagine how it must have felt for Jonathan. If you're saddened by his reply, that means you still don't understand the moral bankruptcy of your position. Sam, what you did saddened a lot of people. I believe in the end, it's not Jonathan you need to reach out to, it's your own moral compass.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- danielrhodes 15y ago
  I'm not seeing why this is all so bad. The whole thing was an experiment to see what would happen and Sam demonstrated one scenario. Self-interest at the cost of societal good is an ever present factor in human behavior and a community cookie jar in the form of a Starbucks card is not going to change that. Jonathan's cold response, given that he obviously thought differently, should be no more suprising than something like this happening in the first place.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
uname_pword 15y ago
Sam, you need to realize you can't do something morally heinous and zero it out by doing something morally acceptable. Just as donating to charity doesn't excuse you for what amounts to wire fraud, being the first to break the ice with Jonathan doesn't entitle you to forgiveness. You've come through loud and clear about your personality. Now it's time for you to make a decision that will affect nobody but yourself: Will you choose to learn from this and be a better person, or will you rationalize it all away and live in blissful ignorance of your own self? I sincerely hope this whole saga makes you a better, more open minded person.
wisty 15y ago
Sam, just man up and apologize. Some people think you are a monster. Some people think you might be doing the right think, kinda. Guess which ones are louder? It's not just that you took the money. You also insulted everyone for being so shallow, when they were trying to be nice. Trying to take the moral high ground is never a good idea, when people think you are wrong. And some people will think you are wrong. Just use the line: "Yeah, I was wrong to take so much. I'd give it back, but some other jerk will just transfer it all, now that the vulnerability is public. Sorry. So I'm giving it away. But please remember, if I hadn't found out that you could transfer the funds, somebody else would have. These sharing apps are great, but they have to be set-up so that no one person can bring them down. Sooner or later, it was bound to be exploited." You could also suggest a fix - "this would work, but only if people only donated small amounts. Nobody will transfer the funds if there's just one or two coffees. It would be safe to start the card again if everybody would try to keep the limit under $20.". Also, you could suggest that the card occasionally put out public service announcements. Aside from warnings about high limits, it could ask the iPhone toting yuppies to throw a few bucks towards the Horn of Africa, which is experiencing the worst famine in years. Or donate to a local charity. But don't make it sound like you are taking the high ground.
- mebesilly 15y ago
  "Some people think you are a monster." Add me to that list.
secoif 15y ago
I too would be interested in jonathans opinion on this.
zohebv 15y ago
Many years ago, a couple of my friends got together and planned a vacation. One of our friends who didn't want to come along jumped in and said - "Hey why don't you take the money pooled in and donate it to earthquake victims instead of taking a vacation." He felt really smug about this suggestion and couldn't stop patting himself in the back about his brilliance. I am not making this story up. The two of you should meet and congratulate each other. Of course, there are several other ways of contributing to charity but I know the itch to scratch when you dreamed up this "awesome" scheme might have been too much to resist. "make sure he's OK" - so you emailed jonathan before you put your script in action, didn't you? "I was saddened by his reply" - One would expect someone who is so easily saddened to have some empathy for his own victims .. or maybe not. Maybe next time, when yuppies buy each other coffee you can keep out or do charity on your own dime?
steerpike 15y ago
What a extraordinary lack of self awareness you're displaying. You're saddened by his reply to your 'olive branch' (and frankly I don't think you know what an olive branch is supposed to look like either) but you're apparently still unable to see how your actions saddened a lot of people who just wanted to encourage a little bit of happiness between strangers.
uname_pword 15y ago
Also Sam I couldn't help but laugh at your answer to this question on the eBay auction: > Q: Is this gift card autographed by the original owner? > A: I'd gladly autograph the card if it increases someone's willingness to donate to Save the Children. He wants to know if someone has signed it like a credit card, so it is tied to that person's signature... not for your autograph. Sheesh.
ivankirigin 15y ago
You two disagree about an idea. This isn't like two fighting factions that need to compromise and share. There is no need for him to take on your view (or vice versa) and the whole idea of coming to terms is misguided. I wouldn't have even sent the email. Your public comments are clear enough. But just in case the replies here arent obvious, your comment reads as self-important and also sounds like you're playing a victim when you clearly aren't. What, he has to go and apologize to you for stomping your gift? Just in case those reading this don't know: I know Sam and would say this to his face. I'm commenting about this exchange and not about the experiment / hack.

neebz 15y ago

why are you saddened by his reply?

Udo 15y ago

I think the olive branch comment is consistent because it conveys an absolute lack of insight into the way your actions are perceived by other people. Sam, the things you wrote on your blog regarding the whole incident left me speechless at first. It wasn't just because of what you did, it was the tone of superiority and confidence you exhibited throughout that made me really angry - angry enough to attack you very harshly in the other thread. I'm not a confrontational person either by any means, but this actually made me mad enough to explode like that in public. I can only try to imagine how it must have felt for Jonathan. If you're saddened by his reply, that means you still don't understand the moral bankruptcy of your position. Sam, what you did saddened a lot of people. I believe in the end, it's not Jonathan you need to reach out to, it's your own moral compass.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
danielrhodes 15y ago
I'm not seeing why this is all so bad. The whole thing was an experiment to see what would happen and Sam demonstrated one scenario. Self-interest at the cost of societal good is an ever present factor in human behavior and a community cookie jar in the form of a Starbucks card is not going to change that. Jonathan's cold response, given that he obviously thought differently, should be no more suprising than something like this happening in the first place.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

uname_pword 15y ago

Sam, you need to realize you can't do something morally heinous and zero it out by doing something morally acceptable. Just as donating to charity doesn't excuse you for what amounts to wire fraud, being the first to break the ice with Jonathan doesn't entitle you to forgiveness. You've come through loud and clear about your personality. Now it's time for you to make a decision that will affect nobody but yourself: Will you choose to learn from this and be a better person, or will you rationalize it all away and live in blissful ignorance of your own self? I sincerely hope this whole saga makes you a better, more open minded person.

wisty 15y ago

Sam, just man up and apologize. Some people think you are a monster. Some people think you might be doing the right think, kinda. Guess which ones are louder? It's not just that you took the money. You also insulted everyone for being so shallow, when they were trying to be nice. Trying to take the moral high ground is never a good idea, when people think you are wrong. And some people will think you are wrong. Just use the line: "Yeah, I was wrong to take so much. I'd give it back, but some other jerk will just transfer it all, now that the vulnerability is public. Sorry. So I'm giving it away. But please remember, if I hadn't found out that you could transfer the funds, somebody else would have. These sharing apps are great, but they have to be set-up so that no one person can bring them down. Sooner or later, it was bound to be exploited." You could also suggest a fix - "this would work, but only if people only donated small amounts. Nobody will transfer the funds if there's just one or two coffees. It would be safe to start the card again if everybody would try to keep the limit under $20.". Also, you could suggest that the card occasionally put out public service announcements. Aside from warnings about high limits, it could ask the iPhone toting yuppies to throw a few bucks towards the Horn of Africa, which is experiencing the worst famine in years. Or donate to a local charity. But don't make it sound like you are taking the high ground.

mebesilly 15y ago
"Some people think you are a monster." Add me to that list.

secoif 15y ago

I too would be interested in jonathans opinion on this.

zohebv 15y ago

Many years ago, a couple of my friends got together and planned a vacation. One of our friends who didn't want to come along jumped in and said - "Hey why don't you take the money pooled in and donate it to earthquake victims instead of taking a vacation." He felt really smug about this suggestion and couldn't stop patting himself in the back about his brilliance. I am not making this story up. The two of you should meet and congratulate each other. Of course, there are several other ways of contributing to charity but I know the itch to scratch when you dreamed up this "awesome" scheme might have been too much to resist. "make sure he's OK" - so you emailed jonathan before you put your script in action, didn't you? "I was saddened by his reply" - One would expect someone who is so easily saddened to have some empathy for his own victims .. or maybe not. Maybe next time, when yuppies buy each other coffee you can keep out or do charity on your own dime?

steerpike 15y ago

What a extraordinary lack of self awareness you're displaying. You're saddened by his reply to your 'olive branch' (and frankly I don't think you know what an olive branch is supposed to look like either) but you're apparently still unable to see how your actions saddened a lot of people who just wanted to encourage a little bit of happiness between strangers.

uname_pword 15y ago

Also Sam I couldn't help but laugh at your answer to this question on the eBay auction: > Q: Is this gift card autographed by the original owner? > A: I'd gladly autograph the card if it increases someone's willingness to donate to Save the Children. He wants to know if someone has signed it like a credit card, so it is tied to that person's signature... not for your autograph. Sheesh.

ivankirigin 15y ago

You two disagree about an idea. This isn't like two fighting factions that need to compromise and share. There is no need for him to take on your view (or vice versa) and the whole idea of coming to terms is misguided. I wouldn't have even sent the email. Your public comments are clear enough. But just in case the replies here arent obvious, your comment reads as self-important and also sounds like you're playing a victim when you clearly aren't. What, he has to go and apologize to you for stomping your gift? Just in case those reading this don't know: I know Sam and would say this to his face. I'm commenting about this exchange and not about the experiment / hack.