How not to JDate

JDate, 4 UR M8! 

I have a vested interest in keeping this story going, because the owner of the PR Differently site and I disagree on how long the story will last. I say it’s got legs; hell, the urban legend version’s lasted four years, and this has audio!

Here goes.

For several years Snopes has been reporting a phantom cheapskate on JDate.

Claim:   Man invoices his date for half the cost of dinner when she renegs [sic] on an agreement to go out with him again.

Status:   Undetermined.

Example:   [Collected on the Internet, 2004]
—————————————————-

Subject: Invoice 6/12/04
Date: Sat, 12 Jun 2004 17:15:59 EDT

Dear Dana:

On June 5, you agreed to accept dinner, paid for in full, by me, based on your stated offer that we would go out again. In that you have ignored all overtures to said follow up meeting, you are hereby considered in breach of contract.

To that end, you are being invoiced for 50% of the cost of the dinner, pursuant to the offer. For the record, the offer presented you with the option of not going out again and paying for half of the dinner, or going out again and not paying at all. You accepted these terms, choosing to go out again, as stated above, but have since failed to deliver your end of the agreement. In that this was merely a promise to meet, and not a promise to marry, the agreement is binding under New York law and does not require a written agreement (i.e. statute of frauds).

Furthermore, this is absolutely not a joke.

Your share is 50% of $74.51 which is a total of $37.25. Payment in full is expected within 30 days.

You may remit to:
Andrew Goldberg
720 Greenwich Street, #4d
NY NY 10012
 

Origins:   This missive from a woman who meets a man through JDate (a Jewish singles network), goes on a date with him, and then receives an invoice for half the cost of dinner after supposedly reneging on an agreement to go out with him again began circulating on the Internet in June 2004.

We don’t yet know whether the message reproduced above reflects someone’s real experience…

What to do when you're dating a Jew: presumably not thisNow, it says “Status undetermined” meaning they don’t know if it is true, but the very fact that it was on Snopes, plus the sheer outrageousness of the story, led people to believe it was a fake.

It wasn’t.

From PR Differently, and you really must go read the whole thing:

COMPLETE WITH AUDIO!!

Our story opens with some background: For the uninitiated, (those who don’t live in either New York, Florida, Los Angeles, or Israel,) J-Date is match.com for Jews. I’ve used it. I’ve had a few good dates from it, a few horrible dates from it, like most everyone has.

And when you have one of those horrible dates, you chalk it up. “Oh, it was just dinner,” you say.

That’s life. There’ll be other dates. Right?

I mean, that’s what we all do, yes?

NOT DARREN SHERMAN. Darren just felt… Well, “wronged.”

So Darren asks Joanne out. Joanne accepts. They eat at China Grill. (Nice restaurant. I’ve been there.) Darren pays, despite Joanne offering to split the check.

At some point after the meal, Darren gets the idea that Joanne didn’t like him.

Rather than just chalk it up to a bad date (hey, it happens, right?) Darren… Well, Darren has other plans.

DARREN EMAILS JOANNE ASKING HER TO SEND HIM $50 FOR HER PORTION OF DINNER.

Ya know, some people are the type to let things go. Some people are the type to accomodate assholes. Some people are the type to hide.

And then there’s Joanne, who saves his harrassing emails, records his badgering messages, and uploads them to the internet, emailing the info to her friends, who email it to their friends, and so on, and so on… Go to the site for the audio and full saga. It’s delicious.

Bonus: naturally, people thought “oh, this is just an urban legend, too. There is no Joanne, no Darren. This never happened.”

Wrong-o, as this investigation by Lowdown proves:

Would-be Romeo Darren Sherman — until recently a little-known thirtysomething business consultant on the upper East Side — is fast becoming famous.

A China Grill manager told Lowdown yesterday: “I called Joanne. She filled me in a little bit — that this was a blind date, that she chose not to see him again. I said, ‘Hey, don’t worry about the bill.'”

Yesterday Sherman told Lowdown: “The whole thing is a hoax. … Please do not contact me again via phone or E-mail. Keep my name out of this. Don’t interrupt me. … Goodbye.” And hung up.

JDate spokesman Gail Laguna said Sherman has been suspended “for behavior that violated the terms and conditions of membership. … This is a great example of why we recommend our members go Dutch on their first dates.”

But then we’d have nothing to blog about, would we? The finale, from PR Differently:

Words fail me here, guys. And seriously – for a publicist? That’s rare.

And of course, much like the Ginsu Knives commercial, just wait. There’s MORE!

Yes, you read that right. Darren has told Joanne that he called China Grill to speak to the General Manager to explain that he should not have been charged for the entire meal – i.e., He expects China Grill to call Joanne and get her half of the bill, and credit his AmEx.

People, I have no motive for lying. You can’t make this stuff up. 

… 

Finally, the fifth voice mail. From CHINA GRILL! They called, apparently as confused as we all are, asking Joanne what the heck was going on.

PR props to China Grill – When Joanne told them the story, they not only told her to not worry about the bill, but offered her a free drink the next time she stopped in. WELL DONE, China Grill’s GM. Someone got their PR training. Bravo.

Is he getting it yet?At this point, kids, that’s where our story ends. Who knows what evil lurks in the heart of Darren Sherman – Perhaps he’s filing a “stop payment” on his Amex Bill…

One thing we do know, though – (and how many times have I said this?) It you put it out there, either on a voice mail, email, fax, or the Internet, it WILL come back to bite you in the ass.

You don’t believe me?

Just ask Darren Sherman.

department of wtf???

You have GOT to be kidding me

From Raj.

quote o’ the day: Martin Luther King on silence

“A time comes when silence is betrayal. Some of us who have already begun to break the silence of the night have found that the calling to speak is often a vocation of agony, but we must speak. We must speak out with all the humility that is appropriate to our limited vision, but we must speak.” -MLK

found on the Freeway Blogger.

video from the grave: the Tasmanian Tiger

Benjy! Baby!This is Benjamin, the last Tasmanian Tiger, also called a Thylacine. It died in captivity in 1936, which is a god-damned shame. Such a beautiful, intriguing animal; do I hafta explain the coolness factor here? It gets the Squid tag.

Like Nessie, Caddie, and Bigfoot, sightings are occasionally reported, but recently they’ve even been reported by confused tourists who had no idea there ever was such an animal, or even such a legend. Veddy interesting…

Alas, the video is skewed somehow, so the URL is here. Here’s a consolation pic:

NOT Benjamin

Let’s try this again:

and here it is again, being annoyed by one of its keepers. ‘Nuther consolation pic. Nice dentistry, eh?

Benjamin again. Smile like an Osmond, that guy!

Undermining Freedom of Expression in China: the Role of Yahoo!, Microsoft, and Google

As I cross-posted on the Shebeen Club Blog:

Undermining Freedom of Expression in China: the Role of Yahoo!, Microsoft, and Google 

By Amnesty International and available as a pdf download here.

‘and of course, the information society’s very life blood is freedom. it is freedom that enables citizens everywhere to benefit from knowledge, journalists to do their essential work, and citizens to hold government accountable. Without openness, without the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers, the information revolution will stall, and the information society we hope to build will be stillborn.’

Kofi Annan, UN Secretary General

Recommendations for Action

Amnesty International calls on Yahoo!, Microsoft, Google and other Internet companies operating in China to:

1. Publicly commit to honouring the freedom of expression provision in the Chinese constitution and lobby for the release of all cyber-dissidents and journalists imprisoned solely for the peaceful and legitimate exercise of their freedom of expression.

2. Be transparent about the filtering process used by the company in China and around the world and make public what words and phrases are filtered and how these words are selected.

3. Make publicly available all agreements between the company and the Chinese government with implications for censorship of information and suppression of dissent.

4. Exhaust all judicial remedies and appeals in China and internationally before complying with state directives where these have human rights implications. Make known to the government the company’s principled opposition to implementing any requests or directives which breach international human rights norms whenever such pressures are applied.

5. Develop an explicit human rights policy that states the company’s support for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and complies with the UN Norms for Business and the UN Global Compact’s principle on avoiding complicity in human rights violations.

6. Clarify to what extent human rights considerations are taken into account in the processes and procedures that the company undertakes in deciding whether and how the company’s values and reputation will be compromised if it assists governments to censor access to the Internet.

7. Exercise leadership in promoting human rights in China through lobbying the government for legislative and social reform in line with international human rights standards, through seeking clarification of the existing legal framework and through adopting business practices that encourage China to comply with its human rights obligations.

8. Participate in and support the outcomes of a multi-stakeholder process to develop a set of guidelines relating to the Internet and human rights issues, as well as mechanisms for their implementation and verification, as part of broader efforts to promote recognition of the body of human rights principles applicable to companies.

Read the whole report online or download it here.