[Algemarin]

> I think it is an interesting idea that scammers intentionally make typos and absurdities, just to weed out discerning people in favor of easier victims

This is an apocryphal anecdote or theory that gets passed around, but I'm not sure how true it actually is, and certainly not universally true. In that, I think scammers are way more likely to just make typos than to setup an elaborate low-level target filter. Regardless, I've also never actually seen scammers admit to this.

[the_snooze]

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/publication/why-do-...

[Algemarin]

This is exactly the kind of thing I was talking about, taken to an extreme. A lot of theorizing about ROC curves and optimal operating point formulae, and absolutely no empirical, qualitative evidence (such as any interviews with actual scammers).

For example, there is no actual sample data provided to substantiate even the premise, let alone the conclusion of this claim:

> In choosing a wording to dissuade all but the likeliest prospects the scammer reveals a great sensitivity to false positives.

[bediger4000]

Thanks for being more eloquent about critiquing that paper than I could be. But that leaves the observation about grammar and spelling in spams and scams unexplained. How should we explain scams terrible presentation?

[teractiveodular]

Occam's razor: the messages are created by the uneducated dregs of society in countries where English is not a first language, and that's the best they can do.