Inquiry on Golden Serpents...aka Jewell Howard

I am embarassed for nobody in regards to this fiasco, as it has no direct bearing on me. The only way I would feel a tinge of embarassment is if I were one of the primaries on either side who seemingly lost the ability to post a rational, valid argument several pages ago. As of late, this is nothing more than a back and forth exchange of ad hominem. As it stands, the only thing being "proven" by either side is who is more adept at using various forms of pseudoreasoning.

Also, a minor clarification needs to be made. That "over two thousand" does not represent views by unique users. The majority of views on any given thread can be attributed to a handful of people.

I would do business with either of them .... I bet they have worked hard for the reputation they have. I can understand how insinuation can be considered an attack and thus help explain Neil's and Jewell's reaction or overreaction (depending on your point of view).

Why?

Because ... This is Sean's inquiry part of the original post

Inquiry on Golden Serpents...aka Jewell Howard

Just wondering if anyone has had any experience with Jewell Howard of Golden Serpents. She posted this ad on Kingsnake.com classifieds on December 11, 2002:

http://market.kingsnake.com/detail.php?cat=6&de=38690

And then there is this part ....

Then I see Neil Gubitz post this ad on December 12, 2002:

http://market.kingsnake.com/detail.php?cat=6&de=39081

So Neil is selling the SAME snakes for $549 shipped while Jewell is selling them for $429 shipped. I am a bit confused since Jewell is selling the SAME snakes for $120 less. And the snakes supposedly belonged to a "J. MENDENHALL". A bit weird that the SAME snakes are being offered by two different sellers at different prices.

See in the last "part" is where Sean fabricates a rumor and comes accross like a kid who knows a secret and just had to tell it ... so make up an inquiry or whatever. That last "part" of the original post has nothing to do with an inquiry about Jewell.
ITS THAT SIMPLE
IMO

I have never done business with any of the people on this thread & I don't sell reptiles for a living, but I have been in business for the last 20 years. If the very first post was an attempt to smear someones reputation it didn't work. If however the first post was an attempt to cause other people to respond in a juvenile manner then it was a smashing success. I have never done any business with any of the parties involved, & probably will not do so in the future. Neil & Jewel might have spotless reputations, & are probably good people, but I was not impressed with their responses. A true business person would state the facts (party A is a wholesaler, party B is a retailer, each has their own pricing schedule), & let their reputation speak for itself. I have to agree with the person who made reference to the playground. The preceding statements are only my OPINION.
Tim Retzlaff

My guess is that anyone who has frequented this forum regularly for more than a month or two has already made up their mind on at least half the members. I would also guess that 90% of those descisions were not made based on any particular deal gone good or bad. I would say that most of the opinions about the people on this forum (and others like it) are formed based on the way the participants conduct themselves.

I seriously doubt that Sean hurt his credibility with his first post. Most people (like me) probably did not even read it since they probably had no dealings with Jewell. I'd be willing to bet that almost everyone has read it now, and do you think they will form their opinions on the first post. No, it is the subsequent posts that will stick in their minds.

In fact there is one member of this forum that I held in high regards untill he started posting on this forum. I still think his animals are top notch, and I have never seen a bad guy post about him. In fact most everyone here holds him up as someone to be emulated. Still, the more he posted on here, the more I grew to dislike him. I will probably never deal with him simply because of the way he conducts himself on these forums. (and no, it is not Neil)

My point is that long drawn out threads with name calling and mudslinging will never get you more business, and even though you may prove yourself to be right in that instance, you will probably hurt your reputation more than help it, and for those that are quick to come to the defense of such people it doesn't take long for you to become guilty by association.

Steve Schindler

Originally posted by Seamus: especially after it has come to light that Sean already knew and had spoken to Jewell over an extended period of time.

Seamus. I will say it for the last time. I NEVER called Jewell Howard or Neil Gubitz on the telephone. I NEVER spoke to either one of them on the telephone. If you would like to see a copy of my November phone bill, I will be more than happy to put it up here for everyone to see.

Also, I emailed Jewell only a few times in November 2002 with the last one on November 5th. I did not email her again until Dec 12. I sent her 3 emails on Dec 12 and one email on Dec 13. That is a very short "extended" period of time to "know" someone.

And just to let you know my confusion on Jewell and Neil's business relationship, I'll put this quote up again. This was sent to me in an email by Jewell on Dec 12th. The full email is posted on page 4 of this thread.

I am not in Tampa but am 40 mile north of tampa, I do not work with Neil he pays me to do his office work and help him care for his animals there is no other association other than that

See the confusion?

Original post by Neil: And YES! I think Sean owes Jewell AND myself an apology.... BIG TIME!

Neil. You will not get it from me.

page after page after page of what..
geez..ive done tons and i mean tons of business with neil and he is a GREAT guy..to me anyhow i believe he would saw off an arm to help me out.
meanwhile..jewell..ive spoken to her and i liked her attitude..her way of speaking with me and all that we spoke about i agreed with..she is a kind and trustworthy person is what i got out of it and i would not hesitate to buy anything from her.

i dont see that problem with two people selling the same snake..if the snake is guaranteed through whomever is selling it for him whats the big deal???

i think sometimes people make something out of nothing for lack of better things to worry about.. or even think about for that matter.

if persons were truely busy would these kind of things seem all so important..do we actually know of something that went wrong here??

i bought one of the snakes via neil from the sick man..ill let you know if anything went or goes wrong but i bet my life it aint going to happen.

just my 02 cents..to be taken with a grain of salt..

Kimmi.... you're my hero!.... lol

BTW.... which snake do you want?? The one that I have? Or the SAME ONE that Jewell has??.... lmao

....Neil

is this a trick question neil???

<i>quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I was referring to the folks that jumped to your (and Neil's) defense over this simple inquiry that opened the gates of hell.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All you had to do was let your loyal customers speak up for your ethics and poof this thread would have eventually died a horrible death.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is it just me or are those statements somewhat contradictory Dwight? </i>

Seamus,
You are correct, as written that does sound a bit contradicktory. Actually what I meant to say in that first quote was... "I was referring to the folks that jumped to your (and Neil's) defense by thoroughly bashing Sean for his initial inquiry." I should have worded that a bit differently thanks for catching it. If you read Kim Felts post on 12-15 (posted an hour or so ago) you will see the type of post I was referring to in the second quote. In her post, she does an excellent job of telling of her dealings with Neil and Jewell <b>WITHOUT</b> blatantly attempting to discredit Sean. So in a nutshell, what I was trying to say was... people could have posted their comments (like Kim and others did) about Neil and Jewell's service/animals/quality/whatever and this thread would have been dead in the water. But before that could even happen, Neil and Jewell opted to post on their own behalf and pretty much provoked this thread into the ghastly pooporama that it has become!! (And Seamus, I'm sure I contradickted myself plenty of times in this post!)

<i><b>You pretty much flat out state that anyone who deffended Neil or Jewell's ethics was a "clique" </b>and then a few posts later, state that all they should have done was allow people to come onto the board to deffend their ethics... </i>

Perhaps it could be misconstrued as that but my clique comment was directed to the group that immediately ganged up on Sean after Neil and Jewell's first couple of posts, <b>not</b> the ones that defending their ethics or business practices. Forgive me if I am wrong but it just seems like there is a certain same group of people that are always so quick to jump on the persecution bandwagon. Was Sean's inquiry that malicious to incite such negative feedback? I certainly did not read it that way.

<i>I think that, outside of myself, everyone who posted in Neil and Jewells deffense has actually done buisness with them. While I haven't sent them money, I have talked to Neil via e-mail about a few potential purchases, even knowing his dislike for window shoppers because I don't have PayPal, I have seen the way they both conduct themselves on this board and I have seen pictures of Neil's animals... Further I have seen the support that they both get from a great number of people who I have nothing but the utmost respect for. I've read and seen and heard dozens, perhaps even hundreds of supportive comments for the Snake Pit and everyone associated with it, if my post stating essentially the same thing as your second quote there was somehow the result of a BOI Cult then so be it I guess. </i>

Now see there, a perfectly good example of what I was getting at in my second quote. You gave your support for Neil <u>without turning this around to make Sean to be the bad guy</u>. In my opinion, that is all that would have been necessary for this post to quickly fall to the bottom of the pile. If Sean's intentions were less than honorable then he would have been foiled immediately. His attempts would have quickly backfired if it were not for Neil and Jewell!!

<i><b>I've asked this a few times before on threads where that phrase has come up and I'll ask it again here for you...

Is it impossible that there are just a number of people who share the same ideals, morals and to some degree, viewpoints? </b>

What about that concept seems so foreign to you? That people may all look, independantly and with the greatest amount of objectivity possible while still remaining human, at the same situation and come to the same or similar conclusions... Why do so many people seem to think that it's the result of something else? By your seeming logic, nobody could ever be convicted of a crime in court unless the entire Jury were made up of the victim's best friends, your assertations that there is anything outside of a mutually compatable viewpoint and perhaps some buisness dealings connecting the majority of posters on this board is ludicrous. </i>

The part in bold above is by all means true. But do you really deny that there exists on this board a certain 'bashing' clique (or bandwagon if you don't like the word 'clique') that rears its head from time to time? People that post with only the intent to dissect and turn around the words of others when they have no dealings with said individuals involved? (Kinda like what I am doing I guess, in reverse)

<i>You disagree that there was anything overtly nasty or vindictive sounding about the initial post, that's fine, you are, as everyone is, entitled to your own opinion and the ability to voice it. Many people seem to have read just as much as Jewell and Neil did based on the manner that the post was worded, especially after it has come to light that Sean already knew and had spoken to Jewell over an extended period of time. </i>

Yes, you are correct. That is my interpretation and my opinion of the initial post. The first post of this thread appeared to be written without any quips, jabs or anything else even remotely offensive towards the subjects of the inquiry when I read it. Sean apparently picked up bad vibes and did an inquiry. Period. Regardless of his wording or supposed intent, does that automatically make him the bad guy? Throughout this entire thread Sean has kept his cool and has not resorted to childish, bratty, or otherwise condescending remarks. Not true for a couple of the other involved parties.

No need to respond to this post Seamus.. unless you really feel the need to rip me a new one. If you do please try to keep it under 20 pages, eh?? Or maybe you could be even more constructive and educate me on your logic analysis techniques,

In retrospect, I guess I really should have stayed out of this thread since I have never done business with anyone involved. I have seen Jewell on several occasions over the years at various reptile shows and expos. I think I saw her in Columbia a few months ago.. I think she was tending a table along the back wall in the 'hot' section? Also was it 2001 when she got that raw deal in Daytona with that crappy 'backroom' table?? (the one that was shared/or was next to Mike Falcon?) My memory gets shaggy after a few weeks, forgive me if any of the above is not correct! I might be placing the wrong face with the wrong name, I must confess that I have never spoken with her and therefore must gather my opinons of her character from her posts here on the forum. And <b>in spite of all my crude attempts at humor and otherwise snide remarks, I do believe that both she and Neil are basically 'good guys/gals.'</b> You can't argue with the facts, they obviously are doing something right. I just think they handled this one wrong. So wrong that I choose to not do business with them in the future. My opinion, thank you for listening and taking it with a grain of salt.

For some reason I felt froggy last night and tried to defend the black sheep (apparently Sean in this case.) Normally I read these 'turn around' witch hunt threads and shake my head. Apparently I should have unplugged my keyboard last night and kept my head where it belongs, up my ... ! Such are the effects of a nightcap brewed in St. Louis.

Thanks for reading,
Dwight Good

---------------------------------------
Bad Sean! Bad Sean! Bad Sean! Bad Sean! Go to your room without any goini!

Quote from Sean:
"Neil, I found out from Andy Barr that the other Goini you have had advertised on Kingsnake.com for months now had an Albino Florida King bred into that line. And I brought it to your attention. Yet you still continue to list it simply as a Goini with no mention of Florida King being bred into it."

Yes I know "goini" is no longer a valid subspecies but it is accepted in the hobby as a distinct breed.

If that's true Sean I'm suprised you would even buy such a specialized snake from a store rather than a specialty breeder or someone who can trace the lineage to wild caught founder animals, better to wait and buy from Krysko. I have had the same problems (not from Niel just in general) in trying to find unrecognized mexicana ssp. with tracable lineage. The sad truth is this has happened with many ssp. in taxonomic flux for which no locality data was ever maintained.
If you are the Sean I am thinking of you live near "goini" habitat, why not collect your own? I know it's harder than it sounds, it may take a few years but in the end you will have exactly what you want. At least you don't have to travel 2,000 miles and get a Mexican collecting permit (virtually impossible if you're not an academic) like I do.