Addendum to rules - posting links to ads

Rich,

No flaming intended - just some good hot and honest discussion.


Rich,

Now correct me if I am wrong, but you often have written that this site was mainly about the BOI, was started mainly due to the BOI and is maintained mainly because of the BOI. As I remember, you also have written that the board may revert back to basically the BOI! The BOI seeming all so important on this site - then presents a few issues - only one of which I will address:

Oh, and about the "high road" thing.... there is no such thing in this business. Not that I have seen, anyway. There are darn few people anywhere that will choose to do something on a purely ethical standpoint IF it will cost them money to do so.

Wasn't the BOI put in place as a sort of a path to the high road for those of us who had been waylaid on the low road by low life scum? Or is it I am missing something here? Sure most of the posts are bad guy posts, there are fewer good guy posts - but that still points me toward those who have taken the high road and who conduct their business in an ethical manner. If you now all of a sudden want to start claiming that ethics and business do not go hand in hand - then brother I am on the wrong herp site! What do you mean there is no high road in this business. I do know a few people who would not ever purposefully screw others no matter how good the deal - simply because they let ethics - not the dollar rule. You cannot really mean that there are no people like this - can you? Are you telling me that your original plan was not based upon ethical concerns when you formulated the BOI - but rather you mean that you only started the BOI and faunaclassifieds with the intent of making money whether or not you did so ethically? PLEASE TELL ME THAT AIN'T SO! Maybe there are NO people who will do things based purely upon ethics - but when push comes to shove and when it comes down to a choice of doing something that is either ethical or unethical _ I do not believe for a moment that there are only people who would choose unethical just because that way would not cost them money or would make them more money. Sure lots of people are like that - but certainly not everyone - not by a long shot.

As for you thinking that these links to ks would cost you money, it makes me kind of confused. Links to pages of kingsnake - that have been removed would likely make someone wonder: 'Hey why did kingsnake.com remove that page unless what I read on the BOI was true". Is that what you are worried about as far as giving kingsnake.com free advertising goes? Maybe I really missed something (no sarcasm at all). So what if they get to that page? So what if they go surfing kingsnake.com? If this is really what you are worried about? If I see it right then, to me it seems to be reasonable to assume that a very soon to come step would be to ban any reference to kingsnake.com on your site because that could also be construed as free advertising or as a way for a newbie to find out about kingsnake.com. That would make this site another kingsnake.com and I am pretty sure you have strongly voiced an opinion against just such a thing in the past.

By the way, as far as the high road goes, there sure as heck is one in the herp business. Many have taken it, because they run their businesses ethically even if it means losing a few bucks here and there. In fact, once their reputation of being so gosh darned ethical gets around, it seems their business grows by leaps and bounds. Man I thought that was what this site and the BOI was all about!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Whatever, this is, as you said, and as I often say, your site to do with as you please. I can only be hopeful (this is my opinion) that when you change things, I don't someday sign on to this site and find out that it has become so much like kingsnake.com that a certain moderator, and (again in my opinion) self proclaimed guide for Dummies or was it for Idiots, is now a moderator on this site too. I truly mean no disrespect - I really just am hoping that what seems to be shaping up has been somehow misconstrued by me.

The whole world is about three drinks behind.

Humphrey Bogart

Maybe because I see it this way because now Bogart is a few behind me - oh well.

One last thing - this is definitely not a ks versus fc pissing contest. This is a purely faunaclassifieds.com and how Rich Z. is running the show sort of a thread - I think. We are not trying to tell ks or Jeff B anything here, we are trying to say something to you about how much we like your site, so much so that we offer our advice when given the opportunity. We do this to try to help you even though our opinions may or may not agree with your opinions and even though we know you may not take our advice. We do it instead of looking the other way because we give a darn about this site. That is all, signing off to make sure that I don't wind up three drinks behind. It is just a party sort of night even if I have gotten to drinking Root Beer because the wine is all bye bye!

I am gonna go an watch The Treasure Of The Sierra Madre - really I bought it for my son for my BD. A bit of reverse present giving for a change. And I promise not to comment on any of the ethical implications in that movie!!!! Best darned Bogart flick ever.....

Good night all.

Best regards,
Glenn B

No, sorry, but none of the arguments I have seen here will hold water.

Just because you don't agree with them doesn't mean they don't hold water. Perhaps you don't fully understand why a lot of people love your site. What differentiates it to me is that as long as we post our name and conduct ourselves maturely we don't have to be concerned about trying to post something that's not allowed.

Once that ad is gone, the whole thread might as well be deleted unless someone did cut and paste it into the thread somewhere.

That's a good point. It makes sence to copy and paste the ad to the post as well.

There are darn few people anywhere that will choose to do something on a purely ethical standpoint IF it will cost them money to do so.

Why did you choose to pay the remainder of the PI bill on Neil's case? I don't believe you gained anything monetarily from that but for whatever reason you thought you should do it. There are many others here that would do things just because they think it's the right thing to do too. I believe there's a lot more honest people here than you think.

Rich

I certainly wasn't flaming you. I have a great deal of respect for you and how you run your site. And I will support any decisions that you think will help Fauna. I have to agree with Glenn again (no he didn't pay me) that this isn't really a KS vs Fauna thing. Its up to you to decide if there is real danger in linking to KS, and what the purpose of the BOI really is. I think that most members of this site are with you no matter what you do, myself included.

I only have one point to make, and you can decide how much water it holds:

Is there a high road?

You say no. Glenn says yes.

I say -- I thought there was. But if not, there should be. I think people SHOULD take honesty and truth in business seriously, and not just go for profit (not that good business can't result in profit).

I have seen many examples of what I THOUGHT was the high road here on this site.

Hell, I can't speak for anyone else, but thats the main reason I come here.

No flames, just

Glenn, you missed so many inferences and innuendos in my message that it is almost comical. Try reading it again when you aren't three sheets to the wind, please. All I will say is that you are WAY off base. All of the inferences had nothing at all to do with the inception of the BOI. It had to do with an incident much later on than that, that shocked me greatly. If you still miss the point, then I am sorry, but I am just not going to go into details and explain it.

As for the "high road" dig, maybe I am talking about a road much higher than the rest of you are referring to. Apparently this was missed as well.

Oh well. I have typed in and then deleted a LOT of text here, over and over again. Let's just say that I obviously cannot explain this in a meaningful way. No matter how I said it, it does not come out right, so I'm done trying.

So on to the main topic of this thread:

I understand your concerns, but I am still unmoved by the contrary arguments. But maybe a clarification and a slight modification from how this was likely interpretted:

I WANT the text and relevant images of an advertisement posted on another site (one in particular) copied HERE rather than simply putting a link to that ad in a thread on THIS site. If you want to state that this ad was posted on XXX site on such and at such time and date and in such and such section, then that is fine with me. If the ad is controversial enough for you to post about it here (in the BOI), then more than likely it will be deleted sooner or later anyway. Even if it is NOT deleted, eventually it will be removed from the source, just based on the date being old enough, and I will then have a dead link here, and the thread has become meaningless. The BOI was intended to be a resource for a long as I am able to maintain it. Having dead links that hold nearly ALL of the meat of the thread completely defeats this purpose. And I still maintain that all of the arguments I have heard against this will not hold water.

The fact that I do not want to have that direct link to a particular other website is only a minor secondary consideration. If there were a guarantee that the link would remain active for all eternity, then I would have NO GROUNDS whatsoever for this change. My liking or not liking the link would not be relevant enough, in my opinion, to warrant what I am stating.

And no, I am NOT going to ban the mention of kingsnake.com from my site, if that is what you are all worried about. Much as it would be justified, I think it would be a self defeating move to make.

I'm sorry if there is a conceptual disagreement here, but unless I hear a "brick wall" argument from someone, that is the way it is going to be. Granted, I will not inspect each and every posting here, and someone will certainly do this and get away with it, but I am making my justification here and now about why I will be deleting any links of this nature.

Please note that I posted this in a thread that was open for debate. It was not just stated as a policy and that was that. If someone can come up with a better idea, then I am all for it, but based on what I have seen, what I want the BOI to be, and how I foresee future events, I believe this is the best course of action. Pending new input, of course.

Thanks.

If the ad is controversial enough for you to post about it here (in the BOI), then more than likely it will be deleted sooner or later anyway. Even if it is NOT deleted, eventually it will be removed from the source, just based on the date being old enough, and I will then have a dead link here, and the thread has become meaningless.

I think I see what you are getting at I think your being miss understoud. You reffering to posts that in the header say " I was ripped off by so and so please read" Then inside it says "heres what I was promised [link to for sale ad] what you seen within that ad was not what I got". Then the ad either expires or the poster of the ad deletes it without it being copied. Hense his whole reason for the complaint just dissapeared the poster doesnt have a copy so the whole reason for the thread becomes a little wishy washy because the posters whole arguament was based on what was read once you clicked the link. Am I seeing things right? If that generic scenerio is correct I think thats what others are not seeing?

Im still for having Richie or someone verify so no one can say anything was altered or can say when something was. Richie I say that because if someone claimed a post was altered and you said ya or na to its acuracy, Id trust your word. Your alot more up to date with the ongoings then I am. So ods are youve already seen it and if you said something was altered thats enough for me or vis versa.

Oh and I agree with what some have said about the classifieds. theres nothing more irritating then an ad leading you else where. "boa for sale" then inside it says "click the link to see pics and prices" I dont care where the link leads, a competing site, the sellers personal site, a photo acount, thats where I stop. I figure if someone is to lazy to put some info and a price about an animal within their ad their probally to lazy to ship it to me as well. So why should I send them money?

Links, we unt neeed no stinkin links............

I don't thimnkl I missed all that many inferences, and as for the BOI maybe you missed mine, but oh well, tomorrow I'll be hung over and sober. Great movie The treasure of the Sierra Madre, and for now I say goodnight Irene.....

Thing is...

Copied and pasted text can be edited.

Screenshots can be edited.

Even saving the page as an HTML allows it to be edited.

Now... purely as a hypothetical... and using Rich as an example, since we can all reccognize it as being JUST AN EXAMPLE...

"Here's a copied and pasted Ad I saw on Kingsnake- "Posted by Serpenco, fifty foot labyrinth albino het for legs burmese python, fifty bucks. Paypal me now since it's first come first serve."

Now... clearly that wasn't posted by Rich, Rich would say that it wasn't posted by him and that it never existed... the other person simply contends that it was deleted.

The reverse is also possible... there is an Ad selling something bad or still posted where the animal was purchased and then misrepresented, the party who was ripped off wants to post a link to show others what the text of the ad said... The bad guy just deletes the ads and then claims that the whole thing is a vindictive hoax.

While dead links are bad... if a link is provided IN ADDITION to the text of the ad or a screenshot, even if it's only looked at and verified to be accurate by two or three people before it's edited or removed, it provides complimentary testamony if the person who was caught decides to deny it later on.

Yeah, Jason, you got it.

Seamus, that is certainly true, until it gets posted on here. Then I am the only one that has the authority to edit something here. And I think it is pretty well known that I am NOT about to do that without an extremely good reason and with the permission of everyone involved.

Please bear in mind that this is NOT a Judge and Jury situation. There will likely always be more gray than black and white, and as such, I chose the name "Board of Inquiry" very carefully. The credibility of anyone making a statement will always be under scrutiny, just as what it is that is being presented. There will be times when there is no clear cut answer except one is lying and the other is not, with no way to really tell for sure which one.

That's the way it goes. Personally, I would feel much more comfortable seeing the evidence from BOTH sides posted here rather than seeing some dead end link with nothing else to support it but the 20 page argument that follows.

Heck, we had a MySQL error on my server one time that erased a thread and one of the combatants was claiming he never said what everyone seemed to remember he said. If I hadn't gone back to a backup copy and recovered that text, it would still be up in the air. When I cut and pasted that text, never once did anyone say that I had falsified that text. And quite frankly, I never even considered that possibility.

I don't know what the ultimate answer is. Anything can be falsified, obscured, lied about, or misconstrued. What it all boils down to is that the readers must decide what they will for themselves based on what they are reading. No one here is going to (at least not officially) slam down a gavel and claim which side is the truth. Unofficially, some people will, but everyone needs to take that with a grain of salt. It is only the opinion of the person posting it, and nothing more.

I WANT the text and relevant images of an advertisement posted on another site (one in particular) copied HERE rather than simply putting a link to that ad in a thread on THIS site. If you want to state that this ad was posted on XXX site on such and at such time and date and in such and such section, then that is fine with me. If the ad is controversial enough for you to post about it here (in the BOI), then more than likely it will be deleted sooner or later anyway. Even if it is NOT deleted, eventually it will be removed from the source, just based on the date being old enough, and I will then have a dead link here, and the thread has become meaningless. The BOI was intended to be a resource for a long as I am able to maintain it. Having dead links that hold nearly ALL of the meat of the thread completely defeats this purpose. And I still maintain that all of the arguments I have heard against this will not hold water.

The fact that I do not want to have that direct link to a particular other website is only a minor secondary consideration. If there were a guarantee that the link would remain active for all eternity, then I would have NO GROUNDS whatsoever for this change. My liking or not liking the link would not be relevant enough, in my opinion, to warrant what I am stating.
.

aaahh thanks for the clarification.
For a while there I started to misunderstand