• 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....

Karma Abuse.

rin0425 said:
gone for good??
Click to expand...

Not at first. I believe it is fair to fire a warning shot. But this is part of my strategy of gradually increasing pressure to get this site to a more professional level and weed out those people who are surreptitiously undermining my efforts. The amount of time they will be allowed to get away with it will be getting shorter and shorter.
 
deborahbroadus said:
Kelli,

I think the negative Karma button can be a good tool. For example, we have already seen that Ed abuses the tool. In our hands it can be a weapon for good.

We have seen that Ed's BG post about Tom Clarke is a flat out lie and I do not believe such a post should go without mention and have Ed get off scott free.

I, for one, will SLAP him with a negative for this PROVEN lie and attempt to discredit a competitor, and if the rest of you do the same thing, we can effectively negate Ed's ability to use this tool in a retaliatory manner ever again! This is a step towards policing the boards and showing our displeasure on abuses.

We have the power to do good.
Click to expand...



I would also like to point out the BS thread Ed made up about Wise Reptiles to deflect his own Bad Guy threads.


Some Ed Clark threads
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/tags.php?tag=ed+clark

Power to the people! :yesnod:

.
 
I'm not sure how I feel about going back in time to slap somebody with negative karma. The concept could be considered similar to mods going back to old posts and hitting people with infractions.
 
hhmoore said:
I'm not sure how I feel about going back in time to slap somebody with negative karma. The concept could be considered similar to mods going back to old posts and hitting people with infractions.
Click to expand...

ie. It's Wrong! :iagree:
 
hhmoore said:
I'm not sure how I feel about going back in time to slap somebody with negative karma. The concept could be considered similar to mods going back to old posts and hitting people with infractions.
Click to expand...

Harald I see your point but at the rate Ed is going he will be perma banned in short order and will still show to have the highest karma here. That in itself could cause others to get taken by Ed. He has proved time and time again that he doesn't deserve the high karma and only has it because of his retailtory posts when someone hits him with a negative. Basically he is using fear as a tool to keep folks from dinging him with neg karma.... kinda like the threads he starts on others when they first start at BG thread on the BOI.
 
It used to be when a member got banned, their karma got hit pretty bad too. Not sure if this still is the case but it might be a solution of whatever the problem is.
 
hhmoore said:
I'm not sure how I feel about going back in time to slap somebody with negative karma. The concept could be considered similar to mods going back to old posts and hitting people with infractions.
Click to expand...

:ack2:But but but...we just got the ability to give bad Karma; Mods have had the ability to give infractions all along, so I don't see the similarity.

The community hasn't been able to show Ed visually that we are displeased, we have just now gotten the ability to "voice" our displeasure with his lies and his lies have just been revealed, I don't see how this is "going back" as in, we had the ability all along and never used it and then suddenly decided to use it?:shrug01:

AND..he got banned before he could get hit!:ack2:
 
Just wanted to add since Chris Allen cant not speak for himself but Chris did hit Ed Clark with negative karma, thats why he started this thread, and in turn I got banned for it.
 
Thanks for reinstating the full Karma feature Rich. :thumbsup:

I sorta predicted Ed would get hit and whine via PM to the mods or by post. Sorry you guys need to needlessly endure such things. But I think your cure ought to get the message across well enough. :D
 
deborahbroadus said:
:ack2:But but but...we just got the ability to give bad Karma; Mods have had the ability to give infractions all along, so I don't see the similarity.

The community hasn't been able to show Ed visually that we are displeased, we have just now gotten the ability to "voice" our displeasure with his lies and his lies have just been revealed, I don't see how this is "going back" as in, we had the ability all along and never used it and then suddenly decided to use it?:shrug01:

AND..he got banned before he could get hit!:ack2:
Click to expand...



I disagree. We have all been disagreeing with Ed's antics plenty. That's why his many bad guy threads are at the top of the BOI, and many, MANY pages long. Because we been disagreeing. :thumbsup:

Ed will be Ed, and trust me, he'll offer plenty of opportunities for those itching to zap him. But it should be treated fairly, not negligently. If it goes away again, then we can't neg posts that really need it.
 
crotalusadamanteus said:
I disagree. We have all been disagreeing with Ed's antics plenty. That's why his many bad guy threads are at the top of the BOI, and many, MANY pages long. Because we been disagreeing. :thumbsup:

Ed will be Ed, and trust me, he'll offer plenty of opportunities for those itching to zap him. But it should be treated fairly, not negligently. If it goes away again, then we can't neg posts that really need it.
Click to expand...

Yes, we have shown our displeasure and some have gotten UNFAIRLY zapped for it.

Ed will be Ed?? What kind of reasoning is that?:ack2:

Ed will be Ed means he can post bad guy posts that are lies on people and get off unscathed? Can't say I think much of your rationalization.:ack2:

Ed just lied and tried to ruin a competitor and his lies were revealed...but all you can say is, "Ed will be Ed?":rolleyes: Ed, hits people with retaliatory negative karma when he's hit but Ed will be Ed.:rofl:

Personally, I like the idea of taking away the toy from the person that is abusing it.:yesnod:

edit: I don't see anything unfair in what I have suggested. However, I do see your rationalization as unfair to the people that will have to further suffer from Ed's antics.
 
Last edited:
Yep, he sure will. :thumbsup:

Whether you like my wording, or not, or agree with me or not is irrelevant. I have no need for you to "relay" what Ed's faults are. I've hounded him for years, I've read all his bad guy threads, probably responded to most, and it does nothing to change the man.

Are you suggesting that in someway its "my fault" that Ed will be Ed? Really, I don't get you post. It's almost like you got a problem with me. There is an appropriate forum for airing your things ya know.


Mark my words, ED WILL BE ED. :thumbsup:
 
crotalusadamanteus said:
Yep, he sure will. :thumbsup:

Whether you like my wording, or not, or agree with me or not is irrelevant. I have no need for you to "relay" what Ed's faults are. I've hounded him for years, I've read all his bad guy threads, probably responded to most, and it does nothing to change the man.

Are you suggesting that in someway its "my fault" that Ed will be Ed? Really, I don't get you post. It's almost like you got a problem with me. There is an appropriate forum for airing your things ya know.


Mark my words, ED WILL BE ED. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

I am not trying to "change" the man. I agree that's a lost cause. I am trying to negate his ability to utilize the negative karma for bad..just as we will eventually do the same to others. Right now, Ed has two very bad (recent) actions that I believe should not go unpunished. It's all well and good to keep replying to his posts..but now, we have a more powerful tool...we can use that!:thumbsup:

Problem with you? Don't know what wall that bounced off.:ack2: Perhaps it's just that I am misunderstanding again?:ack2: It happens.:D

I thought from your wording that you were implying that hitting Ed with bad karma now was unfair? Basically, I was saying the same thing I said to Harald, but tweaked the words to fit your rationalization. :shrug01:
 
I don't want to speak for Richard (well here I go..) but I had the impression from his post that he was just saying we were still voicing our displeasure with Ed even though the 'neg karma' wasn't an option. And now that neg karma is back members shouldn't just go around negging him unwarranted just because or it will be taken away again. I don't think he was saying not to hit him with it if it's warranted.
maybe I'm way off base but I think it was just a misunderstanding of what both of you were saying...?
 
At the first instance of my being alerted to a legitimate usage of the karma system in strictly a retaliatory measure, I will zero out the offender's karma power, effectively neutralizing them from further abuses.

If TWO members are engaging in this sort of abuse, BOTH will be dealt with in like fashion.
 
Southern Wolf said:
Harald I see your point but at the rate Ed is going he will be perma banned in short order and will still show to have the highest karma here. That in itself could cause others to get taken by Ed. He has proved time and time again that he doesn't deserve the high karma and only has it because of his retailtory posts when someone hits him with a negative. Basically he is using fear as a tool to keep folks from dinging him with neg karma.... kinda like the threads he starts on others when they first start at BG thread on the BOI.
Click to expand...

Kevin, I think you are reading his karma wrong. His trader rating (feedback) is high but has no karma. Harald, DAND, and a couple of others have super high karma ratings. Karma is those little red, green, or purple boxes and trader ratings are the numbers of "satisfied" customers hes had.
 
deborahbroadus said:
But but but...we just got the ability to give bad Karma; Mods have had the ability to give infractions all along, so I don't see the similarity.

The community hasn't been able to show Ed visually that we are displeased, we have just now gotten the ability to "voice" our displeasure with his lies and his lies have just been revealed, I don't see how this is "going back" as in, we had the ability all along and never used it and then suddenly decided to use it?
Click to expand...
Negative karma is not a new feature by any stretch...it was just disabled for a relatively short period of time due to the abuses. As far as my comparison, what if Rich created a new infraction today...and I went back and applied it to posts people made 2-3 weeks ago? Does it make more sense that way?
I believe Ed only has as much karma as he does because the system was reset, and we all started over. At what point does going back to hit old posts become abusive?? What if the post was made prior to the last disabling of that feature...a time when people could have responded if they chose to? How many of the people proposing/encouraging this karma bomb even know when the feature was turned off, or for how long?
I thought that karma was supposed to pertain to a given post, not to one's general feeling about a person (though I have no doubt that specific posts could easily be selected). I'm curious how people would respond if they were asked to justify WHY they went back to a 3-4 month old post and hit it with negative karma. Because they couldn't do it before?? I guess that would be acceptable, if the post is sufficiently offensive (yes, that is incredibly subjective, and there is no way to really police that until somebody looks and says This has gotten totally :censored: out of hand.
Southern Wolf said:
Harald I see your point but at the rate Ed is going he will be perma banned in short order and will still show to have the highest karma here. That in itself could cause others to get taken by Ed
Click to expand...
.
Ed does not have high karma...but he does have a high trader rating. The two are in no way related. Giving him negative karma will not detract from his trader rating, so I don't understand what you hope to achieve. And I wouldn't be so sure that the only reason he has a high trader rating is because people are afraid of retaliation. I'm not going to get into a BOI discussion, but I don't doubt that a lot of people were happy with the animals they received from Ed...though I I also can't deny that some people probably were hesitant to leave negatives for fear of taking a hit themselves. Of course, there is no way of guessing the percentage of people that might have been inclined to leave a negative TR who were also able to do so.
 
I seriously doubt Ed will make us wait long to be able to give him negative for current posts. :ack2:
 
Back
Top