You say (half jokingly, I'm sure) you would pay anything for Cartman singing Poker Face because "It transcends earthly concepts like price." but do not hesitate to knock the pricing of Atomic. Who is to say that the song won't sell well? Who is to say that female vocalist, an intense section of the RB community, won't be thrilled to pick up another song by a popular female vocalist? Who gets to decide how much a song is worth and whether or not it's fun enough to justify a $3 price tag? Do you judge by length? Quality of chart? Challenge? Fun?
Well it's up to the label and it's up to the members of the RBN community. If you don't think Atomic is worth $3 you don't have to pay the price. Same goes for any $2 or $1 (or free) songs floating around in the RB set list. But the $3 option has been common knowledge for a few months now, and I'm sure this won't be the last song we see with that pricing. It's unfair to use words like "extortion" or "insulting" just because you don't feel like this particular song measures up to your personal guidelines of what's worth $3.
Pricing in RBN can be changed, so I'd really rather not get into a similar discussion every time a song is priced at $3, since it's clear that there are people in this thread who would be willing to pay $3 "for the right song"... so please use your own judgment in determining which songs are "the right songs". Otherwise, try to keep this thread focused on general discussion of $3 pricing rather than $3 pricing for one specific song.