Shrillomn, a brief expose

While I may not agree with everything Wes says and does here.....at least he has the cajones to do it under his own name, and not hide behind a coward's pseudonym.

True, and I would like to see Pez post under their real identity. But as noted earlier, Wes does not risk very much even using his own name, and quite frankly, it takes far less cajones to behave in aggressive (or childish) ways here, from behind a keyboard, than it does "old style". There are occasional posts in Fauna that show courage ..... but I don't recall seeing Wes' signature on any.

No, it doesn't do, to vilify the entire person. If you're talking information, Wes has a lot of it, and a lot of reptile experience.

True, it does not. But the "entire" Wes is not being vilified. Rather his often distincively malcontent posting, and the waste that it is here. He's the author, and to simplify, as currently constituted, is he part of the problem or part of the solution ? I think that all people are saying here is for Wes to consider ratcheting it down a bit, as he'd be a heck of a lot more effective, and maybe energies here could be redirected towards any number of other noble ends. Its still a worthy challenge to get in the subtle prodding within the elevated game. He's a good enough word-smith to do it.

Originally Posted by lucille

I think it's good to separate behaviors you don't agree with from the entire person. Wes has taken time to give good information to people. He helped me one time when I needed advice about snake mites.

No, it doesn't do, to vilify the entire person. If you're talking information, Wes has a lot of it, and a lot of reptile experience.

I agree with the statement in Bold Lucille. The problem is that in order to get to the useful 10% of what Wes posts you have to wade through the river of bile and nonsensical crap that he spews in the other 90%.

I, frankly, do not find the positive 10% worth the trouble

Guys, if you don't mind it's "cojones" and not "cajones". The latter means "drawers" or "boxes" in Spanish. Back at it!

I LOVE the ignore feature.

And thank you lucille, backhanded though it was.

For those who can't read, I am NOTHING like Robin Hood, he wanted responsibility for those around him, I can't get far enough away from some of you for my own comfort, and still play here, so on to ignore those individuals go.

So if you ignore someone, can they still read your posts? I assume you cannot read theirs if on ignore. Never tried it myself. I always figure even the dummest person on the site might get lucky once or twice and actually offer something good to say. Wouldn't want to miss that. LOL

Originally Posted by Cat_72

While I may not agree with everything Wes says and does here.....at least he has the cajones to do it under his own name, and not hide behind a coward's pseudonym.

Couldn't agree with that more. Sorta hard to take what he has to say seriously at all.

Originally Posted by crotalusadamanteus

So if you ignore someone, can they still read your posts? I assume you cannot read theirs if on ignore. Never tried it myself. I always figure even the dummest person on the site might get lucky once or twice and actually offer something good to say. Wouldn't want to miss that. LOL



Couldn't agree with that more. Sorta hard to take what he has to say seriously at all.

They can still read your posts, be they the dumBest person on fauna or not, when you put them on ignore. That's why chumpco has his little tools quote his posts, to be sure that I, the most important person in his life, sees his pathetic attempts at humor. At least, I think it's humor. It's really hard to be generous enough to actually call it that most of the time though, being as how almost everything he posts is either self-serving backslapping or just pathetically idiotic.

Originally Posted by lucille

I think it's good to separate behaviors you don't agree with from the entire person.

I agree.

Originally Posted by lucille

I think it's good to separate behaviors you don't agree with from the entire person.

Sometimes that's going to be the reverse though. If the majority of someone's behavior is contemptible then I'd say it's pretty fair to slap the label on the individual and make positive exceptions for those rare times they manage not to cause irritation.

Seperating the behaviors you *do* agree with from the individual who, on the whole, you do not.

Originally Posted by Suncoast Herpetological

I agree with the statement in Bold Lucille. The problem is that in order to get to the useful 10% of what Wes posts you have to wade through the river of bile and nonsensical crap that he spews in the other 90%.

I, frankly, do not find the positive 10% worth the trouble

Though 10% is being more than generous.

The Wes of old had its purpose. The present version that like a perforated condom is a mere shadow of what it once used to be and has since outlived its usefulness and function.

Let me see if I have this right...

A troll shows up to expose what are, in his/her opinion, the current flaws of Fauna's moderation status and an unnamed group of its users who "heap abuse" on people here.

The troll is fed and even encouraged.

The owner of Fauna has declared ad nauseum that it's not worth his time and/or trouble to change the current moderation status.

There is heavy evaluation as to what percentage of Wes' posts are helpful, and reams of advice as to how he could become more helpful, along with a determination that "he needs help".

Do I have this right so far?

Here are my thoughts on this:

Accept that Rich will continue to do whatever he wants with this site, as is his right as the OWNER of it.

Someone please take careful notes of Wes' performance as a poster, so that when he receives his next performance appraisal as a Fauna member his deficiencies in satisfying those that don't like his input can be addressed. It may cost him his annual salary increase here, but at least he'll be admonished for not behaving as others would like him to.

Look up the definition of TROLL and then ask yourself if Shrillomn is a representative part of what you might have issues with on Fauna. I'm still amazed that some people are supporting the exact behavior from Shrillomn that Wes is being skewered for. Irony, anyone?

Finally, and most importantly, utilize and enjoy what parts of this site meet your needs and ignore those areas (and people) which don't.

And that's all I have to say about that.