Dennis Hultman dabbles in more than reptiles BAD GUY

[ravensgait]

I was going to ask the same thing why not just move it and stop all the fuss, well some of it anyway. Randy

 

[WebSlave]

1.The BOI has a "full name" rule which gets threads locked or deleted.

2.The BOI has a "you must name the adverse party" rule which gets threads locked or deleted.

3. Why should the BOI not have a "transaction required" rule which can get threads locked or deleted?

And,Yes, I'm familiar with the CDA and related issues,but there seems no fear of that in 1 & 2 above....

That is because there is a significant difference between numbers 1&2 and that number 3. One and two are PROVEABLE infractions (well pretty much so, anyway - there is really NO proof that someone's "real name" is REALLY their "real" name) as to being violations of the rules here. If someone does not use ANY real name or does not provide a personal or business name in the topic line, those infractions are pretty much black and white as being rule infractions.

And there actually is a difference between "locking and deleting" a thread compared to "editing" a thread. This is an important distinction, at least in my opinion. And in any case, it is rather rare for threads to get locked, much less deleted here.

As for transactions, how many of those actually take place without any real proof? At every show I have attended, I have seen that providing receipts was more the exception rather than the rule. And there are most certainly cases of a non-transactional incident of import to someone being clearly of an informational nature that certainly should be included as evidence, even when of an anecdotal nature. Those should be excluded because of rule #3? What happens when a supposed bad guy simply states that the transaction never actually happened and the proof if bogus? Who (and how) is going to verify it?

Now #3 has been suggested more times than I can remember. And the reply has pretty much stayed the same each time I have replied. This is a Board Of Inquiry, composed of everyone willing to participate to give their OPINIONS on such matters or to offer any facts they feel might be relevant. The non participating members are here (viewing said information) because THEY are likely interested in making decisions based on those "facts" and details presented, with a likely consequence of choosing whether or not to do business with someone in question. As such, they are most certainly within the design limits of the BOI to ask any questions they feel pertinent, and to make any comments (within limits of the decorum here) they feel may be relevant to the issues at hand.

Truth is not something that is the white glaring beacon we wish it were. "Facts" are not always facts. "Truth" can be relative. The GOAL of the BOI is not so much to necessarily resolve any issue absolutely, so much as it is to provide the opportunity for people here to make decisions based on what they see presented. Yes, some will find lies believable, and others will disbelieve the truth. That is their decision to make. There is no "judge" here, other than each and every person here "judging" the validity within every post made. There are no final binding "decisions" other than those decisions people will make based on their "judging" what they read. If any arbitration takes place, it is between the two parties involved, and not through any specific efforts of the staff on this site. The closest we will get here to any ABSOLUTE TRUTH is a BULK of evidence (which may not even be factual) or a weight of opinion (which could be completely wrong), which ANY viewer has the opportunity to use however they feel is best for their OWN personal or professional decisions. But that, of course, is THEIR decision to make.

 

[FunkyRes]

At every show I have attended, I have seen that providing receipts was more the exception rather than the rule.

While your point most certainly stands, some shows now don't let you out the door with a live animal that doesn't have a receipt. Sac was that way last year anyway.

 

[Golden Gate Geckos]

Quote:
You must spread some karma around before giving it to Dennis Hultman again.

Dennis, you are one class act.

Dennis, you ARE one class act!

 

[Jim O]

That is because there is a significant difference between numbers 1&2 and that number 3. One and two are PROVEABLE infractions (well pretty much so, anyway - there is really NO proof that someone's "real name" is REALLY their "real" name) as to being violations of the rules here.

Yes, as far as we know WebSlave is your "real" name. J/K of course but I do remember at one time you commenting that your real name would be in all of your BOI posts.

 

[fuscusking13]

Well here is my two cents on all this legal crap. Matt has come here and apologized for the mistake. If Dennis and Matt both agree to have the thread moved(like to the sound off forum as earlier suggested) then how could there be any legal repurcusions(I most likely butchered the spelling here)?? Why doesnt Rich just ask both if they would mind moving it to the sound off, or wherever, and if both parties agree end of story and everyone can move on in their life. Why must everything be so difficult with such simple solutions available?? I think if Matt did not agree to allow it to be moved then that would show that perhaps his apology was just to save face and not indeed sincere. If Dennis doesnt want it moved, well the thread is about "him" and if he doesnt mind no harm no foul. Thats how I would approach this if it were me for what its worth. Take care, Dan M.

 

[Cat_72]

Or maybe if we just let the thread die and didn't keep it right at the top of the BOI, it would help as well.

Just a thought.

It has been shown that it was NOT the Dennis Hultman that posts here, "our" Dennis is a true good guy...and Matt has done what he has done. I don't see what more needs to be added to keep it alive.

 

[Fraybee2003]

Finally, someone speaks out.

 

[morph evolution]

francis this boi is 5 years old,what do you have to do with this thread being brought from the dead?

 

[SirenSanJose]

Finally, someone speaks out.

... did you even READ the thread? This is a FIVE YEAR OLD post about a totally different Dennis Hultman who isn't even IN the reptile trade.

 

[Fangthane]

This thread's resurrection is nothing more than a pitifully feeble retaliatory strike for Dennis having uncovered evidence that exposed Francis as a liar and a scammer.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1535230#post1535230

 

[Dennis Hultman]

Finally, someone speaks out.

Francis, regardless of the title I don't know why you bumped this good guy thread for me. It wasn't necessary.

This was my last communication with the thread starter.

While I appreciate everyone’s statements, I would still have treated this complaint as invalid even if it were I. There is a difference if someone was scamming someone and one started a thread about the person. From what I gather, from what was posted, that this person had a civil fine imposed on them. It would still have no place here.

Should a persons bankruptcy be posted? It’s a civil matter. To start a thread out of the blue that “John Doe” filled a bankruptcy. Would that be acceptable? My opinion would be no.

Matt didn’t post because he had a bad transaction with me. I didn’t have a bad transaction with someone else. It was started because he hasn’t liked my comments about how he has treated his recent customers and others.

The thread is going to stay. Since this has absolutely nothing to with a transaction, I would just rather like to see this one sink to the bottom. Unless, someone has or had a bad transaction with me then I would definity encourage you to post or contact me directly to resolve it.

There is a perfectly good feedback forum to discuss the reasons why a thread should be started, locked or moved.

I have to apologize for the error I made. I was sent this link
http://www.azre.gov/PUBLIC_INFO/Bulletins/Bulletin_01.07.pdf

I shouldent have posted it.. Dennis I apologize I was wrong!!!

Matt, as a matter of principle, I would hope that even if you were correct, you would apologize.

Going down the member list posting this member had two parking tickets. This one had three speeding tickets. This one has heath problems and couldn’t pay their hospital bill. This one couldn’t pay his taxes. While maybe true, in my opinion, should never be posted because you dislike someone.

As you know, I am all for applying peer pressure to someone being dishonest in their business dealings in this community or outing scammers but this wasn’t the case for your thread here. I have never had a problem as a buyer or seller.

I have commented on your business as the forum allows and you don’t like or agree with my recent comments. I can understand that, but disagree.
Because you don’t agree with me, I’m not going to try and find out if you didn’t pay the phone bill ten years ago or if you were actually born Mary and changed it to Matt. That isn’t my concern.

I most certainly will not start a bad guy thread about you if you weren't scamming someone or I hadn't had a bad transaction with you.

That is about all I can state about this thread.

Agreed and it was Martha

The thread speaks for itself. Have a great day!

 

[Paul Kent]

This thread's resurrection is nothing more than a pitifully feeble retaliatory strike for Dennis having uncovered evidence that exposed Francis as a liar and a scammer.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1535230#post1535230