Prankster Code of Conduct

Hi, Friend.  To continue our conversation from last evening: There is a Prankster Code of Conduct.  As a practitioner, I have to strike just the right balance of quick believability with a dash of absurdity.  The goal is not to fool everyone.  That is too easy.  I use the 30/30/30 rule.  Thirty percent of people should know right off it’s a prank.  Thirty percent should be totally fooled into believing and taking some action as a result. However, the crafting of the prank involving the other 30% should cause this remaining group to be unable to decide whether it is a prank or not, wavering in their uncertainty.  If the prank is tipped too far one way, the precious balance is lost resulting in what I call outright prank failure.  It should never be immediately obvious that it is a prank or that it is not.

Consider this year’s Facebook prank post:

“I accidentally broke our glass shower door.  It’s a lot of glass.  Trying to glue the pieces back together is taking too long.  Any recommendations on a good company to fix it?  Geez.  No injuries, just a ripped shirt.”

The fundamental question:  Is this a prank?  If so, what aspect is the prank?  The placement of the words suggesting ideas is key in the prank.  It must be believable but contain enough of a hint of absurdity that the prankster can say, "Really, what day is it?"  The utterance of this phrase is the prankster’s version of the unveiling or dénouement  at which point the realization of the prank should occur to almost everyone.  Occasionally, a prank can have another unveiling following the first.  However, this is strictly for master’s level pranksters.  Multiple pieces must be in place for successive unveilings to work while continuing to maintain the 30/30/30 rule.

Questions the victims of the prank might ask themselves:  Did this really happen?  She’s not really trying to glue the pieces together?  Is she really requesting a company referral?  The questions themselves bring up the 30/30/30 rule.  A balance of recurrent thirds is maintained.  (Yes, it happened but a year ago.  No, of course she’s not gluing the pieces.  No, it’s been fixed for 9 months and we already knew who to call.)

Here are other examples:

“We’re thinking about buying a house in Mexico sight unseen since it’s not safe to travel. Any words of wisdom?”

Or this:

“I took a three hour art class via zoom with local artist, Lonnie Spikes, and this was my final product. Amazing!  He’s good.”

In each case, there is an element of truth. Where does truth begin and absurdity end?  With mounting evidence, at what point is the pattern revealed?  The worst prank is the one everyone believes. Such would be a dismal failure and would require piling on increasing layers of absurdity until the tipping point of the unveiling is finally reached. 

The 30/30/30 balance is found in the consistent uncertainty experienced by the 30% who cannot make up their minds how to respond.  Thus, prankster equilibrium is achieved.  This is why Pranksterism is considered an art form.  Although, this recognition primarily comes from other pranksters or astute observers of the form.

Oh, and as you are a numbers person, the other 10%?  That is the fudge margin used by pranksters to ensure they always get the 30/30/30 balance leaving no audit trail.  I am not familiar with the appropriate accounting terminology here.  Suffice it to say, it’s a slush fund where accounting balance is maintained by movement into or out of columns by using this fund to ensure each column balances.  Also, this mythical 10% is the  dénouement in this message for you, my friend, as you have been impatiently wondering what the hell happened to the missing 10% since the beginning of the discussion.

Thanks for studying the science of pranks with me.  Let me know if you have questions or feedback.  Another longer term question to consider is why some people such as I are drawn to Pranksterism?  We can analyze this question at another time.

As you can tell, I'm fond of you.

Joceile

4.1.21