FaunaClassifieds
 Sponsors   Breeders | Dealers |  Importers/Exporters | Caging | Feed | Supplies | Services | Events 
  Inside FaunaClassifieds  Chat  |  Product Reviews |  Classifieds!   | Photo Gallery   | Banner Advertising 
 
  Want to help support this site? Click here.

Go Back   FaunaClassifieds > Admin Area > FaunaClassifieds Feedback Forum

Notices

FaunaClassifieds Feedback Forum Anything of a nature concerning this website, moderators, admin, or anything having to do with how it is being run, should go here. Criticism is welcome, but abusive antagonism is not. THIS IS NOT THE FORUM FOR FEEDBACK CONCERNING BUYERS AND SELLERS! THE BOI IS SOLELY FOR THAT PURPOSE.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-28-2012, 08:32 AM   #31
Focal
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snake-Queen View Post
It is my understanding that the program has not been pulled yet.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...42&postcount=5
 
Old 02-28-2012, 09:43 AM   #32
hhmoore
Read post number 28 in this thread...the one just before your statement about the membership table.

The audits are done (have been for a couple of days now - thank you, Melissa and April, for your help). I gave Rich a quick read, based on the 3 pages I reviewed, on Saturday morning....I'll be compiling the rest of the info this morning, and will make a post here (that post may - or may not - be done before I leave for Pittsfield...if not, I'll finish it this evening)
 
Old 02-28-2012, 09:48 AM   #33
Focal
Gotcha. I'm not good at this whole reading thing, especially obvious stuff.
 
Old 02-28-2012, 12:24 PM   #34
hhmoore
Okay - here goes...rather than the hodgepodge of information that I through at Rich, I'm going to try something different.

To start, it should be pointed out that there were 165 GGCs (not including revoked, suspended, or withdrawn certificates) when we started this audit.
Of those 165, 93 were showing yellow....one was related to a name change, so I'm going to call it 92 that have allowed their paid membership to lapse.
That is 55%.

Of those 92:
35 do not have valid websites
21 have some sort of site/page, but no certificate posted
-----(it should be noted that this includes redirects to Facebook pages and sites under construction/revision)
36 have websites with the GGC posted (regardless of whether it is in the designated place)



Now, to break it down a little more...
of those 92:
29 have not logged on to this site in at least one year
2 are listed as invalid members
1 has made a brief return appearance with the last year, but I know he hadn't been around for a few years before that.
I'll call that 32 inactive members...
so just over 1/3 of the expired certificates belong to people that no longer use this site.

Of the GGCs recorded in 2012
- 2 are expired (since they were recorded 6 days before the start of this thread, they had to have expired in that time. One of those has been removed due to Malware Alerts, but the other one doesn't yet have the certificate posted)

of those recorded in 2011
- 4 are expired

recorded in 2010
- 9 are expired

recorded in 2009
- 11 are expired

recorded in 2008
- 15 are expired

recorded in 2007
- 12 expired (13 show yellow, but I'm not counting John)

recorded in 2006
- 16 expired

recorded in 2005
- 24 expired


Only 36 of the expired GGCs are posted on a website..of that group:
- 21 have logged onto this site within the past 6 months
 
Old 02-28-2012, 12:53 PM   #35
AGoodwin
looks to me like pretty damning evidence that the GGC program is a waste of time
 
Old 02-28-2012, 06:57 PM   #36
hhmoore
Why?
Because people have gotten out of reptiles? It happens.

I think no matter what is attached to it, contributing membership will always be a battle. People will do it - for whatever their reasons - but a portion of them will not renew. Some may forget, some may not be able to afford it (I find that claim amusing most of the time, given some of the purchases made by the people using that excuse), and some may think they they don't get enough in return.
After that, there is the issue of maintaining a website. Sounds like a great idea; but not everybody enjoys it, or can do it themselves. Of course, the work involved is only a portion of that...there is also the cost - and if people "can't afford" the $25/year for a Contributor level membership, they sure can't afford a domain and hosting.

The GGC program wasn't a bad idea, but I suspect it didn't take off as well as Rich had hoped. The previous audit that I did was a while ago...and I'm not really sure what prompted me to do it. I suspect it started with something Rich mentioned, and - like this time - I took it upon myself to take a look. (I will say it is a lot easier with the workload divided!) With the new program, it was simple to see who was expired...last time, I had to check each person's account individually. If the program continues, I would suggest that some sort of audit should be done semi-regularly...maybe twice/year. Contacting member's whose subscriptions have expired with a reminder can be part of that.
IF it continues, I'll talk to Rich to see if there is anything I can do to help with the process. I know that setting them up manually is time consuming, and probably a pain in the butt; but I'm sure that a long waiting period after submitting the application is a disappointment, and I suspect that some people just never bothered to go back and put the certificate on their site.

I don't see the program as a failure, myself...but if greater numbers would make it seem better, then maybe we should look at the website requirement. Rather than turning people away from the program who don't want to maintain their own site, maybe the application could be amended to include a question along the line of: Do you have a website on which you will post the certificate? If the answer is no - they could be assigned a number, but not issued the code for the certificate. Every thing else would be the same - as far as the poll, and the standards for maintaining a positive trader rating and poll score. At audit time, with no website posted, there would be no need to check for the certificate. It would save time in set up, and open the program to more people.

Bottom line, a lot of the certificate holders are no longer using this site; and I think a sizable portion of them are no longer selling reptiles (or are doing so on a much smaller scale). Heck, it's no secret that I've been thinking about getting out, especially with the constant legislative efforts against reptiles - between the costs, the time, and the space, losing the snakes would change my life. I'd have more time to do things I enjoy, be able to go on vacations, and have more money to save (and spend). I don't think I'm quite there yet...but I'm closer than I've been in a long time.
 
Old 02-28-2012, 07:16 PM   #37
Lucille
Quote:
Originally Posted by hhmoore View Post
I'd have more time to do things I enjoy
I think you should always try to do that; over the course of a lifetime for many people, the things they enjoy doing will change. Of course we all have responsibilities and they are not always pleasant (no matter how much spin you put on it, housework is just boring and it keeps on needing to be done no matter how well you do it, those dust bunnies multiply like rabbits, for example) but you only live once. Drink more (and better) bourbon, travel, have fun.
 
Old 02-28-2012, 07:46 PM   #38
hhmoore
I'm in the process of refinding the enjoyment I used to get from my animals. It's become a chore, and I guess losing all those eggs/babies last spring affected me more than I thought.
Getting rid of the other house will do me a world of good - in terms of both money and time.
I think losing the bullsnakes is going to be on the agenda this spring - I don't like them any less, but I dislike where they are & the extra work it causes.

Didn't mean to make this about me, I was just an example.
I don't think that people moving on reflects poorly on the GGC; and some of the expired members may renew if it is brought to their attention. I think I would focus that energy on those members that have been here within the past 6 months; but some of the people were never active on this site - it was simply a means of advertising - so I'd consider others on a case by case basis.
 
Old 02-28-2012, 09:17 PM   #39
AGoodwin
maybe I should re-word. Its not that I think the program itself is a bad idea or a waste of time, its just that it seems to be more trouble than it is worth due to the large number of people who do not keep up their end of the deal.

I personally don't think a website should be a requirement. I like the idea of a person being able to just get a cert# and if they want, a nice seal they can post on their profile or their facebook page or whatever.

With more frequent monitoring, I suppose it could run a lot more smoothly, however there is still the matter of getting the accounts set up. Perhaps there is some way to simplify / streamline the process so that it is not such a task. One thing that may help is having it done in batches rather than as each application goes through. Just put aside an hour or so once a week to do it. I am not sure exactly how long it takes so I am unsure if that is a reasonable amount of time to put aside, but you get the idea.
 
Old 02-29-2012, 12:44 AM   #40
Snake-Queen
Quote:
Originally Posted by hhmoore View Post

The previous audit that I did was a while ago...and I'm not really sure what prompted me to do it. I suspect it started with something Rich mentioned, and - like this time - I took it upon myself to take a look. (I will say it is a lot easier with the workload divided!) With the new program, it was simple to see who was expired...last time, I had to check each person's account individually.
Work is always easier & faster when divided. You are welcome Harald.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hhmoore View Post

I don't see the program as a failure, myself...but if greater numbers would make it seem better, then maybe we should look at the website requirement. Rather than turning people away from the program who don't want to maintain their own site, maybe the application could be amended to include a question along the line of: Do you have a website on which you will post the certificate? If the answer is no - they could be assigned a number, but not issued the code for the certificate. Every thing else would be the same - as far as the poll, and the standards for maintaining a positive trader rating and poll score. At audit time, with no website posted, there would be no need to check for the certificate. It would save time in set up, and open the program to more people.
Perfect idea!
 

Join now to reply to this thread or open new ones for your questions & comments! FaunaClassifieds.com is the largest online community about Reptile & Amphibians, Snakes, Lizards and number one classifieds service with thousands of ads to look for. Registration is open to everyone and FREE. Click Here to Register!

 
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BOI Good Guy Certification dragonlvr64 FaunaClassifieds Feedback Forum 4 09-07-2011 12:08 PM
A reminder about the Good Guy Certification program. WebSlave FaunaClassifieds Feedback Forum 4 09-28-2008 08:34 AM
? about Good Guy Certification Certificates WebSlave FaunaClassifieds Feedback Forum 31 02-13-2006 02:27 PM
Neutral votes in Good Guy Certification Forum Mike Greathouse FaunaClassifieds Feedback Forum 28 03-04-2005 11:41 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:06 PM.





since April 17, 2002




TESTING!
Fauna Top Sites


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.09740305 seconds with 9 queries
Content copyrighted 2002-2014, FaunaClassifieds, LLC