Good Guy Johns Stranahan/ JasBalls

[WebSlave]

Go with your instinct, it has always served you well. This is just my opinion though, but a person who writes hateful racist remarks in a public forum feels that way. It's unacceptable no matter where it was said.

But if I do that, where do I draw the line? Would it really be acceptable for me to ban everyone from this site who says anything derogatory and hurtful about anyone here on any other place on the entire web? That sure would be a lot of territory to cover... It may actually be best for people concerned about such things to just stay away from those places where such people frequent. There is a lot to be said for the "out of sight, out of mind" philosophy. I am actually quite comfortable knowing that I have ejected certain persons from my "world" here and I don't have to read a single word they will write ever again unless I choose to do so.

 

[hhmoore]

a person who writes hateful racist remarks in a public forum feels that way.

 

[Southern Wolf]

But if I do that, where do I draw the line? Would it really be acceptable for me to ban everyone from this site who says anything derogatory and hurtful about anyone here on any other place on the entire web? That sure would be a lot of territory to cover... It may actually be best for people concerned about such things to just stay away from those places where such people frequent. There is a lot to be said for the "out of sight, out of mind" philosophy. I am actually quite comfortable knowing that I have ejected certain persons from my "world" here and I don't have to read a single word they will write ever again unless I choose to do so.

Rich.... that was sent via FaceBook.... are you suggesting folks not frequent Facebook?

 

[WebSlave]

Rich.... that was sent via FaceBook.... are you suggesting folks not frequent Facebook?

That is up to them. I certainly don't need to go there.

 

[chamgirl99471]

That's why the Block User Choice is so nice.

 

[deborahbroadus]

I wish it were that easy, Webslave, but that would mean that I can't go anywhere on the Internet or off? I might as well just stay in bed under the covers because people like John, Joe and their ilk are EVERYWHERE and there's no avoiding them. Sometimes you don't even know who's what until you open a message like the ones I received.

My FB is a family connection book, very few friends on there (I had avoided having one for years).There was no way for me to avoid that message.
Facebook sent it to my Yahoo and it was from FACEBOOK. When you click open FACEBOOK messages sometimes the whole message from whomever is right there.

There is also no way for me to avoid messages sent to my forum in the nature that these were sent.

He has since been blocked.

I do my part, but sometimes even when you wipe really good, there is a streak left behind.

 

[The BoidSmith]

Rich,

No, you don't need to be patrolling every site; but once you learn about it either directly or indirectly it is best to take action on it. If you tolerate it, it will reflect badly on the site, management, and members. You have banned or suspended people for saying derogatory things about this site on other places, even in private e-mails that saw the light, and we agreed with it. This is far worse.

 

[WebSlave]

Rich,

No, you don't need to be patrolling every site; but once you learn about it either directly or indirectly it is best to take action on it. If you tolerate it, it will reflect badly on the site, management, and members. You have banned or suspended people for saying derogatory things about this site on other places, even in private e-mails that saw the light, and we agreed with it. This is far worse.

That is a different kettle of fish.

I certainly reserve the right to deny anyone who belittles me or this site anywhere else on the net their privilege of accessing this site and using it's facilities and resources. This is simply because I believe that if they feel that way about me or this site, then I am not inclined nor obligated to allow them to use the resources here that I have built and maintain. Not that I always act on this when made aware of it, but that doesn't mean that just because I haven't yet that I won't.

However, what you are asking of me is that I extend that sort of scrutiny to cover EVERY member here. To block any person who says something derogatory or belittling about ANY member on this site. I am sorry, but I am just not inclined to take up that kind of a burdensome crusade.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

I wish it were that easy, Webslave, but that would mean that I can't go anywhere on the Internet or off? I might as well just stay in bed under the covers because people like John, Joe and their ilk are EVERYWHERE and there's no avoiding them. Sometimes you don't even know who's what until you open a message like the ones I received.

My FB is a family connection book, very few friends on there (I had avoided having one for years).There was no way for me to avoid that message.
Facebook sent it to my Yahoo and it was from FACEBOOK. When you click open FACEBOOK messages sometimes the whole message from whomever is right there.

There is also no way for me to avoid messages sent to my forum in the nature that these were sent.

He has since been blocked.

I do my part, but sometimes even when you wipe really good, there is a streak left behind.

Deb, I believe facebook has a way to report the message. I believe the policy is the same, that they don't allow such posts.

No, you don't need to be patrolling every site; but once you learn about it either directly or indirectly it is best to take action on it. If you tolerate it, it will reflect badly on the site, management, and members. You have banned or suspended people for saying derogatory things about this site on other places, even in private e-mails that saw the light, and we agreed with it. This is far worse.

My friend, I disagree. Nothing is tolerated like that here and to think we should police the comments that are made on other sites is just a little to much. To suggest that because we do not take an action for what someone stated on another site is an fact tolerating such behavior, is a bit of a stretch.

Rich made the rules that those types of comments aren't allowed and that reflects well on the site. Those types of comments have been posted here before and been meet with swift action from the staff here. I think that reflects well on the staff here. The members here have addressed those past posts with disgust and rebuke on this site and I think that reflects well on the membership here as well.

Although I think we are discussing it in the wrong thread, It's allowed to be exposed here which reflects on the site well. Don't you think? Many sites wouldn't let this conversation happen.

While I find the comments disgusting and I would have immediately removed him from this site if it happened here, I don't think it is our responsibility to remove people for what I perceive is a serious flaw in their character. I can just enforce the ground rules here on this private property.
Rather, I think it is better to expose it.

Honestly, I find the comments and the character of such a person who would type or utter such, disgusting. I have no respect for someone who would state such things.

There are a lot of types of behavior from people I don't care for but here is where we might have a disagreement. The people of the world have a right to offend me.
I'm not interested in policing the thoughts of others all over the web. I am comfortable with keeping them inline with the policies of a private website and holding them accountable for what they do here. I don't think Rich would be putting himself into a very good position by banning people for their statements elsewhere on individual communications that don't involve the site or him personally. That's a very large can of worms and trying to enforce it fairly would be a nightmare.

As far as I'm concerned, Joe or anyone else has the right to be a lowlife racist scumbag. To have those thoughts, isn't a crime. Although, the way it was expressed, a savvy lawyer could make it an actionable offense.
The point being is that he doesn't have the right to do it here. But if he finds some comfortable little hellhole on the net that allows such filth, he should crawl in it. There are some places that that type of behavior is allowed but not here.
I'm not interested in seeking out members and banning them based on morality or character of statements they made elsewhere. Where would we draw the line? Only outspoken obvious racist? What about someone who once belonged to a separatist group? Someone I believe belongs to a hateful church and I find some of their statements disturbing? You could go on and on.

It is our responsibility to control what happens here. To suggest that we are somehow responsible and tolerant of what happens to people off this site is really ridiculous.

We aren't tolerating , if anything, we are exposing and making a stand that that type of behavior in unacceptable here. My personal belief is that is
much more important than just simply banning someone for their actions somewhere else. I have a feeling that most find the comments just as horrible as I do.

 

[Southern Wolf]

Deb, I believe facebook has a way to report the message. I believe the policy is the same, that they don't allow such posts.


Rather, I think it is better to expose it.

Honestly, I find the comments and the character of such a person who would type or utter such, disgusting. I have no respect for someone who would state such things.

Agreed.....I have no use for someone of his calibar. I may have a confederate flag tattooed on my arm... but that aint what it stands for to me.

 

[The BoidSmith]

Sorry but I would have to respectfully agree to disagree. If no one knew about then great. But once you learn about by not taking adequate action you are condoning it, no way around it. It was not hearsay, it was "spray painted on Deb's walls" for the world to see. This is unacceptable behavior and people get fired for things they post in the web. Everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions, and particularly for this one. Sorry you guys dismiss its importance.

 

[hhmoore]

Dan,
I hope you know that I have a lot of respect for you and your thoughts....
Please consider this for just a moment: Where would it end?

Say this we were to ban Joe for the message he posted on Deborah's wall. Do we then ban the person that posted (in response) that Joe is a , and a racist ?

What if we then come across another member, posting about something totally different, that used a rather mild ethnic comment surrounded by some coarse profanity? Should there be recourse there, as well?

 

[WebSlave]

Sorry but I would have to respectfully agree to disagree. If no one knew about then great. But once you learn about by not taking adequate action you are condoning it, no way around it. It was not hearsay, it was "spray painted on Deb's walls" for the world to see. This is unacceptable behavior and people get fired for things they post in the web. Everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions, and particularly for this one. Sorry you guys dismiss its importance.

OK, that's fine. So why don't YOU patrol the internet, and every time you see someone posting such things, do something about it yourself and report them to the authorized managing entity of that website? Also find the ISP of the person making such posts and get their access to the internet revoked, while you are at it. I'm sure that sort of posting will be out of compliance with their TOS. That sort of crusade doesn't necessarily have to be limited to anything related to the members here on this site, does it? I'm sure you will be able to find entire websites just filled with that sort of talk to keep you busy in your endeavor.

So instead of trying to slough this burden onto me, how about YOU doing it yourself if you feel that strongly about it? As far as I can tell, you have every bit as much authority and responsibility to pursue the path I have suggested for you as you seem to feel I have the authority and responsibility to pursue the path you appear to be demanding of me. And therefore in a similar fashion, if you decline this suggestion, then are you not condoning such postings yourself?

It's REAL easy for someone to get all righteous and indignant when they feel someone else should be responsible to rid the world of what makes them indignant, now isn't it?

 

[Southern Wolf]

Dan... look at it this way. The world now knows what a racist piece of crap he his. If he starts crap on fauna... you can always link them back to the post so they can see him for who he is

Let me relate something to you. I contacted someone about trying to get a certian individual banned from their site because of what they did over here and to me. I was informed that they havent commited a bannable offense on their site so they couldn't ban that individual. They went on to tell me that because of what transpired that individual wouldnt find a home on thier site. The 'cat was out of the bag' and the individual had been exposed for the trash they were. While I didn't agree with that decision at the time.... I now see the wisdom behind it. That idividual is now not welcome by the members.... and they didn't even have to get banned.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

Sorry but I would have to respectfully agree to disagree. If no one knew about then great. But once you learn about by not taking adequate action you are condoning it, no way around it. It was not hearsay, it was "spray painted on Deb's walls" for the world to see. This is unacceptable behavior and people get fired for things they post in the web. Everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions, and particularly for this one. Sorry you guys dismiss its importance.

What is this site? What should one expect? This is a website designed around the reptile industry/hobby. This site is used for this purposes.

The BOI was designed to give feedback about individuals and businesses.
To applaud those that excel and bring forth information that people may want to consider before doing business with someone. To expose wrongdoing in this community so potential buyers and sellers can make more informed choices of which individuals you will be doing business with.

Ground rules were laid down to enforce the way that we will do this here. One of those rules is that we will not tolerate racial or prejudicial remarks.

IMO, this is what should be expected of a good site to assure that the membership here can function well and not be harassed by hateful comments.
That does not mean that we have a mandate to police all the members here on their personal beliefs or what they do off this site. Set aside this particular case and racism in general. Do you really want us judging what beliefs a member can have before or during their membership here and ban those that WE decide don't live up to our morality?

Should we look at ever out of context message someone brings to our attention regarding any personal matter and try to judge if it harassed or hurt someone that has absolutely nothing to do with this site?

Just as an example-
What if Deb, sent a message back that was equally disgusting and racist. Should we ban them both for a conversation that had nothing to do with this site? Will we excuse it because she was provoked? Is the conversation any of our business as moderators or have any weight on their ability for them to post here?

The site has never even been about banning those from the community that do wrong in the reptile community. Simply to bring forth knowledge for you the reader to decide. As a site, we don't ban people for being liars, thieves, murders, etc. etc.. We allow you to expose it. You to decide what weight is given to it. Unless it is obviously completely irrelevant to the topic, You decide if its value or relevance to a thread. We don't make that determination. You do!

Because we don't ban a user because someone claims them or proves them by the preponderance of evidence to be a scammer does that mean we condone thieves and liars? No, we (as a site) don't. You provide that information and each individual reader gives it the appropriate weight. People are banned for violating the rules not a judgment on their character flaws determined my a moderator or majority vote.

If you think about it, you don't want us to make those decision. The disagreements on any given thread about who is telling the truth should be clue enough. What some think is wrong and what some think is acceptable can be surprisingly different sometimes. I don't want that power here. I want you to decide for yourself.

Again, Nobody dismissed it. Nobody condoned it. Nobody has stated thus far that the message was acceptable. Unfortunately, I'm sure there are some that will have no problem with it. I'm sure some will make excuses for it. I'm positive some will come forward and state as long as they obtain great animals from him, they don't care. Such is those who stand on little principle always do. Should we ban them too?

 

[The BoidSmith]

This is my last comment on this before I get banned for antagonism There is no room in my house for racist people, period. You will not see me address this individual in a discussion ever. The argument here is that if a crime did not happen in my house it is not a crime; as ridiculous as it may sound. This is not about patrolling the internet; this is about finding that a hate crime was committed and do nothing about it because it didn't affect me. There's always the possibility that I'm wrong and the rest is right. If that's the case I'd rather be in the wrong side.

 

[Southern Wolf]

I think the point Dan is trying to make is..... What he did would not be tollerated here if it happened here. The evidence was provided and he admited to saying it... .not that he could deny it... his name was on the evidence.

The staff of Fauna didn't have to scour the internet to find the proof... it was given here.

While I agree it is a very slippery slope from the staff's point of view.... I also see Dan's point of view.

 

[WebSlave]

This is my last comment on this before I get banned for antagonism There is no room in my house for racist people, period. You will not see me address this individual in a discussion ever. The argument here is that if a crime did not happen in my house it is not a crime; as ridiculous as it may sound. This is not about patrolling the internet; this is about finding that a hate crime was committed and do nothing about it because it didn't affect me. There's always the possibility that I'm wrong and the rest is right. If that's the case I'd rather be in the wrong side.

I'm sorry Dan, but you just fail to understand the concept of "jurisdiction". My "jurisdiction" is only within the boundaries of this site and nowhere else. And it is apparently so that what is against the "law" here in my "jurisdiction" is NOT against the "law" within other "jurisdictions". I am sorry, but I just do not have any authority to enforce any "law" broken outside of my own "jurisdiction". Those "jurisdictions" are responsible for enforcing their own "laws", not me. It is not "illegal" HERE unless it happens HERE.

I take it that you are not going to accept my recommendation to contact those other "jurisdictions", then? How does that make your declining to act on this issue in that manner any different from mine in reference to what I chose to do here?

 

[deborahbroadus]

The two opposing issues are not actually in opposition; they are just different perceptions. Boidsmith seems to be approaching the issue from a moral standpoint, and I seem to see Webslave as approaching it from a logical standpoint. Those two perceptions do not always agree with each other.

Moving on...... as the decision is WebSlave's to make and I do understand his stance.

LIFE IS TOO SHORT TO WAKE UP IN THE MORNING WITH REGRETS.
SO, LOVE THE PEOPLE THAT TREAT YOU RIGHT, FORGIVE THE ONES WHO DON'T, AND BELIEVE THAT EVERYTHING HAPPENS FOR A REASON.​

 

[RJK890]

This is my last comment on this before I get banned for antagonism There is no room in my house for racist people, period. You will not see me address this individual in a discussion ever. The argument here is that if a crime did not happen in my house it is not a crime; as ridiculous as it may sound. This is not about patrolling the internet; this is about finding that a hate crime was committed and do nothing about it because it didn't affect me. There's always the possibility that I'm wrong and the rest is right. If that's the case I'd rather be in the wrong side.

Really... A hate crime !!!

He sent her an offensive email via Facebook.
That is not a crime, nevermind a hate crime.