Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Hultman
Rodney, So let's just say we all agree and scammers shouldn't be on here. That we weed them all out. So where do we start and who makes that call?
Who is going to be responsible if we weed out a honest person or miss a bad guy?
Who interprets correct business standards? Do we eliminated everyone we disagree with their return policy? Can you find a dozen "good guys" that agree on a set of standards? If you can, I think you also can find another who disagree with them.
The term "scammer" itself is very subjective. Do we just use it for this purpose for people who don't send product or animals? Or do we include people who don't honor a return? How do you prove they didn't honor the policy without a shadow of doubt?
It isn't such a cut and dry statement to state we should eliminated all scammers, liars and thieves.
Then you have to take into account the liability issue of a site who states they are removing "scammers". Sites operate under different rules that best protect themselves while catering to the needs of those that use their services. Some don't pay much attention to the legalities and some do.
But for most they operate under some framework to protect from liability.
Here people are allowed to post their experiences and information on the BOI and are accountable for their statements. Each individual makes those statements not the site. The site doesn't pronounce guilt. The individual readers give each post the weight they feel it deserves.
If it didn't work that way and the site was held accountable for what others do, nobody would have the ability to posts their experiences because the owner isn't going to accept that responsibility.
The site is able to give you the ability to post a BOI thread because we don't make those judgment calls of who is telling the truth and pronouncing guilt.
The readers and individual posters do that.
|
could you please answer this question
you have created a medium for buying and selling. it was of your own volition. no one forced you to create this. when you create something you are responsible for it and i realize yu cant control how people choose to react to , or us it to facilitate it for their own personal gain or misuse it. all the people that have got ripped off on fauna is in no way was directly your fault but without fauna it wouldnt have happened. so do you fell no need to regulate it a little more. and dont try to us the cop out that just because you created something its not up to you to police how people use it. like in the case of a gun or car manufacture. no they cant control how its used. and that would not be comparable example since its out of their hands they are no longer involved. they offer up a produce and sell it. fauna is much different. you created this and set up some rules for use and you monitor it daily. you recognized from the beginning the need for regulation.
my point is that there could be a little more done about the blatant scam artist that rip people off.
and why wont anyone answer my question about big daddy. hes a perfect example of someone that needed to have his ability to advertise to he general public limited
i know you dont want to play judge and jury im not saying you should for every little boi thread. that would be stupid.
faunas reputation is sometimes seen as the safe haven for the losers that got kicked off kingsnake.
as far as not having the time to regulate a little more what gos on on this site i find it hard to believe you dont have the time. every time ive swore in a thread ive got an infarction within an hour of doing so. so you have time to catch that but not time to deal with classified post that are clearly misrepresenting animals and so on.
again im not talking about strict rules for posting or banning everyone that gets a bad guy boi
but i think you could at least hand out infractions or red flag people that consistently practice bad business.
as for how to deal with the issues is where i think the problem is. its the set of guidelines and rule that must be established first.
1 i think you should at least investigate a little when evidences is shown that an add is deceptive. such as the ballistic balls post with one of my animals. i showed the snake in question here at my house. i had pics of the parents, it hatching out and so on. the genetics were shown to be not what he was advertising it as. and once that was dont the only action taken by the mods was basically telling people to stop harassing him about it. he was never told to remove the post. why? it was a direct attempt at deception on his part. just a few weeks earlier he had the same snake posted for sale as being what it was and it didnt sell so he posted it as something it wasnt.
i agree that going after every scammer after the fact would be a never ending battle.
but to do something about it before hand would go a long way.
if you had a disclaimer that your site would try to ensure that scammers would be held accountable for their actions in the form of infraction, losing their right to post and even being ban if their behavior continued. but at the same time said you can in no way police every single transaction that occurs. i think it would go a long way with the customer. i have to admit that it would deter to some extent some of scumbags from even using your site and with less of them that means less stupid boi,s that you guys get drug into all the time. in the beginning i think it would be a lot of work but in the long run i think it would lead to less headaches
as for the liability issue. bare in mind its a private site and you have your own set of rules like you keep reminding me every time i swear.
as for the word scammers being subjective i think that will lead to a useless argument of linguistics. and at the same time i think it also shows the value of the boi. if it cant be proven then the boi is there
What words did YOU use?
Linear Mode
