• Responding to email notices you receive.
    **************************************************
    In short, DON'T! Email notices are to ONLY alert you of a reply to your private message or your ad on this site. Replying to the email just wastes your time as it goes NOWHERE, and probably pisses off the person you thought you replied to when they think you just ignored them. So instead of complaining to me about your messages not being replied to from this site via email, please READ that email notice that plainly states what you need to do in order to reply to who you are trying to converse with.

  • IMPORTANT! PLEASE READ!! About the Google Adsense ads being displayed

    =====================
    Posted 08/15/2025
    =====================


    Yeah, I know. They are a pain in the butt. But they pay the bills to keep my server running. Just a fact of life, I am afraid.

    Want to get rid of them? Simple. Just become a Contributor level member or above and they will be gone. -> Please click HERE."

    Is that too much for me to ask of you to keep this site running? Well, sorry about that. I too wish I could get everything for free. But alas.....

    =====================
    Addendum: 01/10/2026
    =====================


    Google Adsense ad revenue for December, 2025 was just $30 over the cost of the lease for the server running this site. So, in effect, the money providing the incentive for me to continue running this site is coming SOLELY from the paid memberships and sponsorships here. Which honestly ain't much....

Bad Guy Guy Brunke AKA Guyco Gecko - Theif, liar, flipper

Skanndelus aka Erik Ryerson, AKA Guy's website designer.

http://www.ryersondesigns.com/

Maybe you should have told people what your lot was in this whole situation before you started posting telling people to piss off---

Big surprise that Guy Brunke's only defense is coming from someone that was paid by him. I don't see many "satisfied customers" posting. :shrug01:
 
yea i am his web designer. i built his site. i also sold him geckos that he re-sold later. guess what? i am absolutely fine with it. i knew once i sold something that he may sell them... but at that point it isn't really up to me anymore.

as for the photo, i really don't care to argue the legality of it. the way i see it is he bought a gecko and then used a photo of the gecko he now owned and paid for, for his own use.

i really don't think any of this is a big deal, way overblown for what it was.
 
Meg90 said:
Skanndelus aka Erik Ryerson, AKA Guy's website designer.

http://www.ryersondesigns.com/

Maybe you should have told people what your lot was in this whole situation before you started posting telling people to piss off---

Big surprise that Guy Brunke's only defense is coming from someone that was paid by him. I don't see many "satisfied customers" posting. :shrug01:
Click to expand...

BUSTED :thumbsup:,how sad the only person defending guy is someone he pays . really speaks about both guy and this persons credibility doesn't it
 
skanndelus said:
even if i'm wrong, big deal. the guy's butthurt that someone might make more money on a gecko he sold for less. that's the issue. you're all a bunch of cry babies with too much time on their hands.

*cry* *cry* copyrighted *cry* *cry* making more money than me *cry* *cry*
*life's not fair*

get a life
Click to expand...

I keep trying to read your post, and I'm certain you typed something, but for some reason every time I look at it, I get this weird hallucination of a pouty 14 year old boy. Anyone know why this might be?

Seriously though, I can't imagine how you managed to wander into the BOI without realizing that - SHOCK AND AWE - it is primarily to warn buyers and sellers of other buyers and sellers, whether it is to warn them how great they are or to warn them that they are liars and cheats.
 
ozz465 said:
BUSTED :thumbsup:,how sad the only person defending guy is someone he pays . really speaks about both guy and this persons credibility doesn't it
Click to expand...
One must wonder why a 'professional website designer' would actually promote the stealing of photos and whether his lack of regard for copyright issues would come into play in his business dealings.
 
skanndelus said:
yea i am his web designer. i built his site. i also sold him geckos that he re-sold later. guess what? i am absolutely fine with it. i knew once i sold something that he may sell them... but at that point it isn't really up to me anymore.

as for the photo, i really don't care to argue the legality of it. the way i see it is he bought a gecko and then used a photo of the gecko he now owned and paid for, for his own use.

i really don't think any of this is a big deal, way overblown for what it was.
Click to expand...

lets say tell guy you would only sell the gecko if he kept it and not flipped it , and he flips asap ., would it not bother you?? as for the pic , guy bought the gecko not the pic and technically stealing right there . so now that your last argument was destroyed you no longer care if its wrong or not to steal pics??
 
skanndelus said:
yea i am his web designer. i built his site. i also sold him geckos that he re-sold later. guess what? i am absolutely fine with it. i knew once i sold something that he may sell them... but at that point it isn't really up to me anymore.

as for the photo, i really don't care to argue the legality of it. the way i see it is he bought a gecko and then used a photo of the gecko he now owned and paid for, for his own use.

i really don't think any of this is a big deal, way overblown for what it was.
Click to expand...

Overblown about usage? So it is Ok for someone to use one of your logos or designs with written permission? It is nice to see a web designer that dose not care about usage.... like you said it is on the PUBLIC web, so fair game for anyone to use. Makes me wonder if you have your clients supply you with unauthorized images to use...
 
i don't think, in this particular circumstance, that the use of that photo was a big deal. it isn't something that would bother me, but to each their own. he only took the photo in order to advertise it right? as far as i know yes, if he had sold the gecko, i don't see what use he would have for it in the future? it just isn't something i see as a big deal... MAYBE if it was some professional photo scanned directly out of a book, and then posted on a website to sell an animal, i could see the problem, but the way that this all played out, i don't see the problem with it.

as for my morals as a designer, i either use paid for graphics/photos or design/take my own, unless content is provided to me by my clients.
 
skanndelus said:
i don't think, in this particular circumstance, that the use of that photo was a big deal. it isn't something that would bother me, but to each their own. he only took the photo in order to advertise it right? as far as i know yes, if he had sold the gecko, i don't see what use he would have for it in the future? it just isn't something i see as a big deal... MAYBE if it was some professional photo scanned directly out of a book, and then posted on a website to sell an animal, i could see the problem, but the way that this all played out, i don't see the problem with it.

as for my morals as a designer, i either use paid for graphics/photos or design/take my own, unless content is provided to me by my clients.
Click to expand...

*cry*

Now that your integrity is being questioned, the situation is a little bit more serious, huh? :rofl:
 
no. i really don't care. i still don't think any of this is even worth a discussion, whether it is technically legal or not.
 
I think this discussion is great. I am glad that whoever searches Guy Brunke will find this thread, and be able to know who they are dealing with.
 
skanndelus said:
i don't think, in this particular circumstance, that the use of that photo was a big deal. it isn't something that would bother me, but to each their own. he only took the photo in order to advertise it right? as far as i know yes, if he had sold the gecko, i don't see what use he would have for it in the future? it just isn't something i see as a big deal... MAYBE if it was some professional photo scanned directly out of a book, and then posted on a website to sell an animal, i could see the problem, but the way that this all played out, i don't see the problem with it.

as for my morals as a designer, i either use paid for graphics/photos or design/take my own, unless content is provided to me by my clients.
Click to expand...

Eric, you are one in a million for not being bothered by someone using someone elses photo for financial gain.

As the son of a photographer I understand that the photo is his livelihood and should be respected as such. If my father takes a photo he owns the photo or his employer owns the photo but when someone else wants to use the photo, that my father took, that person or entity has to pay royalties to my father or his employer.

If you have enough of an understanding to use royalty free media on your customer websites then you have a general understanding of the way copyright works.
 
IP Address Search for IP Address: "70.187.140.70"
70.187.140.70 : ip70-187-140-70.oc.oc.cox.net
Post IP Addresses

* Guycogecko 70.187.140.70 [Find Posts by User] [View Other IP Addresses for this User]
* skanndelus 70.187.140.70 [Find Posts by User] [View Other IP Addresses for this User]
Click to expand...

Have anything to state before I ban both of your accounts for multiple violations of this site's TOS?
 
skanndelus said:
yea i am his web designer. i built his site. i also sold him geckos that he re-sold later. guess what? i am absolutely fine with it. i knew once i sold something that he may sell them... but at that point it isn't really up to me anymore.
Click to expand...

Lucky you Mr. Ryerson. You're fortunate to have had the luxury of foreknowledge that he may sell them. So far i haven't heard of a single breeder who supplied him that knew beforehand what he was up to. What we have seen so far is plenty of his deception.
 
Back
Top