Is the Fall From Grace fatal to the Good Guy Certs?

And this isn't about NERD as it is a moot issue since there will more than likely be no email from them explaining their actions or any changes which might take place, but I am sure NH Fish and Game will . This is purely about a flawed system which as Karen stated will allow those not directly related to business transactions to vote in a positive or negative way thus effecting that person/business's "Good Guy" rank. Those who screamed at David for doing the same some are now doing really need to look into this a little deeper because it is looking like it is a do as I say and not as I do type of forum.

You're wrong Brian.

You have to look at WHO it is that you are relying on to give you information about someone else. Do what you think is right, good or bad. When people see that THEY can decide whether or not to give YOUR opinion any weight at all.

It may be a somewhat longer process than one would like but if you don't know all the names they can be looked up and researched and then you have THAT background to help you decide whether or not to agree with people.

So I don't think it's as you say. I think it's do as you will but be ready to back it up.

After some thought let me attempt to explain what is going through my mind as to this good guy/bad guy thing. We're talking about my vote with respect to Bill Leverton and David's vote with respect to NERD.

A vote in that poll should relate to the business ethics of the party involved. If it was limited to people who had done business with Bill the vote might be 10-1 in his favor and he is a lying, stealing scumbag. That poll is meant as a "can you confidently do business with this party?" Well...let's take Bill first because he is easy. Bill is an admitted thief. He stole a snake and then tried to peddle it. And then lied about it. And he admits he is a scumbag. Not a tough choice. He gets a sign and a "bad guy".

What NERD did was as dumbass as it comes, but it does not rise to the level of "they cannot be trusted to give you what you pay for or to honestly do business with". It was dumb, some might call it criminal, but it in no way impugned, say, the value of a Ball Python or Blood Python that someone might buy from them. So, for the UMPTEENTH time, yes I am outraged at what I saw in those pictures (there Karen, I have said it YET AGAIN) but in my opinion it is not a reflection of their business ethics, just a reflection of bad judgement, perhaps stupidity.

And that is why I voted Bill a bad guy, and think that NERD does not deserve the same, and did not deserve it from David. David made his point, put a stain on NERD's reputation. Spread enough chum so the sharks from elsewhere all descended here and chewed them up to no end and that is sufficient.

And now as for the personal comments Karen, if and when you can get off that high horse you are on where you hold me to some ridiculous standard and accuse me of being a hypocrite and condoning what was in those pictures, and being a doctor who won't admit I am wrong...when you can come down and talk, I will happily retract my statement and make amends. Until then, leave me out of your tirades. I really am not interested in more fighting on this subject.

Originally Posted by wilomn

No. THIS thread is about whether or not the Certification Program can function when one of it's members looses his certification. Are we able to police our own sufficiently to keep the respect of the general public type of thing.

Not by allowing people who HAVEN'T DONE BUSINESS WITH others to give negative or positive points on a whim because it is a popular concept at that time. That is just a "Jump on the bandwagon" type of poor judgement.

That's still weak Wes... According to that logic anyone that disagrees with what they did can STILL give NERD neg points here... and who can argue the fact?

You have to decide to whom you give CREDIT enough to listen to their opinion.

If Joe Dipthog says Greg Riso is a scumbag and gives him neg. rep points and a badguy rating I, meaning me myself, have to decide whether or NOT I'll believe what Joe Dipthong had to say.

Once I have decided whether or not I CARE what someone has said THEN I can determine if further action is needed by me. If I don't believe what they say, then what does it matter WHAT they say?

When gubitz vouches for sal what do you guys think?

That's what I'm talking about. Consider the source before you decide whether or not to believe what that source has said.

A vote in that poll should relate to the business ethics of the party involved. If it was limited to people who had done business with Bill the vote might be 10-1 in his favor and he is a lying, stealing scumbag. That poll is meant as a "can you confidently do business with this party?"

What NERD did was as dumbass as it comes, but it does not rise to the level of "they cannot be trusted to give you what you pay for or to honestly do business with".

That's a nice esoteric division, but how well will that hold up in actual practice? How can you insure that there won't be more grey areas in the future?

What's called for here is quite simple. In a case like this, in the face of outstanding evidence of this sort of thievery and obvious bad business - a special vote of no confidence should be held that allows the people of Fauna to act as a jury in matters like this... one at a time.

Jim tried to agrue the fact, but based upon ethics what NERD did would be wrong also. Showboating venomoids around at an educational show placing innocent people in danger. If that is high ethics I quit this herp community. Ethics can cover a very broad spectrum and not be limited to fair business practices.

So Bill admitted he was a lying cheating scumball. At least he had a pair to admit to being in the wrong unlike some here. Do I agree with Bill's plight? No not at all, a theif is a theif and needs to be treated as such. Was this gone about in the wrong manner? Yes. Why not just pull the good guy certification when he admitted to being a theif and be done with it? Maybe because it would have taken away from other members twisted method of amusement..

You have to decide to whom you give CREDIT enough to listen to their opinion.

Nerd admitted to doing something that is percieved as very poor judgement. Such poor judgement that some may decide to never do business with them again! Should the masses be able to just vote thier feelings and strip away thier Good Guy cert in the light of such evidence? Or should it remain true only to the business applications like Jim said?

Originally Posted by CaptainSlackass

Nerd admitted to doing something that is percieved as very poor judgement. Such poor judgement that some may decide to never do business with them again! Should the masses be able to just vote thier feelings and strip away thier Good Guy cert in the light of such evidence? Or should it remain true only to the business applications like Jim said?

We each have to decide tha.t. We have to decide it both for ourselves and who we comment about as well as who we believe when they say so and so is good or bad.

Each of us has to make that decision individually.