jungle bob

Originally Posted by brd7666

Jungle Bob responded to the claims that were made by the OP. The OP is the one who needs to provide proof, he started it all. He is making claims that he apparently can't back up.

I didn't say the OP doesn't need to provide proof, I just said it was odd that the buisness owner defended his reputation with nothing but words, thats all.

---------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by brd7666

Jungle Bob had evry right to say what he said. So what, he admitted there was a dead animal in his store, what does that mean? Animals are going to die in pet stores, it happens everywhere. Sounds to me like the OP is not claiming income from his sales.

Lovely. That is your opinion, no facts though, and again no proof. Maybe you don't care if there are dead animals in a store, but I can assure you many other people do.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by brd7666

Most if not all pet shops feed their animals a maintenance diet. This kind of diet is fine, yes they don't grow a whole lot, but it doesn't mean they are not healthy. Retail stores are in business to make money, and over feeding only cost's the store more money.

Again this is your opinion. I provided you with facts about Leachianus growth and health that showed the animal was clearly very very small for it's size (if it was indeed that size when purchased), and provided the fact that a healthy and stress free Leachianus will grow, not stay the same size. And if the animal is not growing (and therefore not healthy) there is only one logical conclusion to draw, which is that the animal is unhealthy.

------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by brd7666

Provindig a link to another site is proof of nothing, it needs to be posted here, and by the OP, not you. And you say you are not taking sides, but it does appear you are defending the OP. Also, those pics mean nothing anyway. They are not in the store and they could be pics of something he bought somewhere else. The original post was all about how bad the store was and how bad the store owner is, not about an animal he bought.

Sometimes it feels to me like you are using your opinions to break down my argument, which is fine, but it doesn't render you much credibility. Notice how (I feel like I've posted this about 4 times now) the other thread I provided a link to proves nothing except that the animal is now doing well and growing, regardless of where it was first purchased. And I never said otherwise, thank you very much.

---------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by brd7666

When the OP started this thread he was not even talking about a specific species. It was only a post later on that he brought it up. And you claim you bought aniamls from a store, is it the store in question, I am guessing no. And it sounds like the store you bought from feeds a maintenance diet also. Again this is common practice in the industry. You say the store didn't listen to your advise, well you just said the animal was still alive three months later. So they couldn't be doing anything too bad or it would be dead. I don't see a problem.

Well I see a problem with your logic, sorry to say. I really have to disagree with the statement "So they couldn't be doing anything too bad or it would be dead". I will use an extreme example here but torture for interrogational purposes is not designed to kill anyone, yet I think you would agree that is unhealthy. Also not providing your children with adequate amounts of food is considered "bad" (among other things) but a child can still get by on the bare minimum.

And no I did not buy an animal from the same store or ever state or imply that I did.

And I claimed to understand how the OP feels about seeing Leachianus geckos improperly cared for. I also claimed to not be taking sides because I was just providing everyone with more facts that many people seemed to be ignoring. That is all.

Originally Posted by StrictlyExotics

Was he even asked? Consdiering that MANY people have to come to speak on Jungle Bobs behalf, besides Jungle Bob himself, I would tend to believe the masses versus the "one" who only professes their outstanding reputation.

No, Jungle Bob was never asked to provide proof. But I find that odd since everybody only seems to care about seeing proof from Chris. But I agree that since Chris is the OP he has more of a responsibility to provide proof than Jungle Bob does.

And you can believe whoever you want, I don't care, but just because the masses are supporting one person and not another does not mean that the masses can't be wrong.

Originally Posted by aschnell

No, Jungle Bob was never asked to provide proof. But I find that odd since everybody only seems to care about seeing proof from Chris. But I agree that since Chris is the OP he has more of a responsibility to provide proof than Jungle Bob does.

And you can believe whoever you want, I don't care, but just because the masses are supporting one person and not another does not mean that the masses can't be wrong.

The burden of proof belongs to the accuser first, not the one whos being accused. As for proof coming from Jungle Bob, I would tend to take the word of many experienced reptile keepers who have frequented his store versus an ex employee with no shred of evidence.

Originally Posted by StrictlyExotics

The burden of proof belongs to the accuser first, not the one whos being accused. As for proof coming from Jungle Bob, I would tend to take the word of many experienced reptile keepers who have frequented his store versus an ex employee with no shred of evidence.

That's fine, but there is something that Jungle Bob does need to prove, and thats his statement that Chris worked for him. I'm not saying that Chris didn't work for Jungle Bob, I'm just saying we don't know that for sure, that's all.

Originally Posted by aschnell

That's fine, but there is something that Jungle Bob does need to prove, and thats his statement that Chris worked for him. I'm not saying that Chris didn't work for Jungle Bob, I'm just saying we don't know that for sure, that's all.

Actually, I dont think Jungle Bob needs to prove anything until we have been shown evidence to the contrary. The OP has made one post to defame this Shops reputation without any evidence whatsoever. Jungle Bob has made his claim and has had many character witnesses to speak on their behalf.

I think the OP needs to make his case now.

Originally Posted by aschnell

I didn't say the OP doesn't need to provide proof, I just said it was odd that the buisness owner defended his reputation with nothing but words, thats all.

What do you suggest the business owner use to defend himself? When the OP provides proof of his claims, then the store owner should provide more, but until then, I think he did just fine, and so do most of the others here.
---------------------------------------------------------



Lovely. That is your opinion, no facts though, and again no proof. Maybe you don't care if there are dead animals in a store, but I can assure you many other people do.

I never said that I didn't care. I said it happens and that is a fact. I have been in this business for years, and I have sold to many pet stores. I have seen a dead animal here or there at every store I have ever sold to at one time or another. It sounds to me like, you don't know much about this business.
-----------------------------------------------------------



Again this is your opinion. I provided you with facts about Leachianus growth and health that showed the animal was clearly very very small for it's size (if it was indeed that size when purchased), and provided the fact that a healthy and stress free Leachianus will grow, not stay the same size. And if the animal is not growing (and therefore not healthy) there is only one logical conclusion to draw, which is that the animal is unhealthy.

Just because a reptile does not grow a lot, doesn't mean it isn't healthy. These are reptiles, and in the wild I can assure you, they don't eat anything like we feed them in captivity. Maintenance diets are usually just fine. ------------------------------------------------------



Sometimes it feels to me like you are using your opinions to break down my argument, which is fine, but it doesn't render you much credibility. Notice how (I feel like I've posted this about 4 times now) the other thread I provided a link to proves nothing except that the animal is now doing well and growing, regardless of where it was first purchased. And I never said otherwise, thank you very much.

Sure, I am using my opinion to break down what you say. I can say this, I have a lot more credibility around here then you do. The link you provided provides this case absolutley nothing. It is completely irrevelent, and of no use to this topic. This topic is not about an animal or even a species of animal. You seem to forget what it is about. I think you need to go back and read the OP's original post, maybe then you will get back on topic.
---------------------------------------------------



Well I see a problem with your logic, sorry to say. I really have to disagree with the statement "So they couldn't be doing anything too bad or it would be dead". I will use an extreme example here but torture for interrogational purposes is not designed to kill anyone, yet I think you would agree that is unhealthy. Also not providing your children with adequate amounts of food is considered "bad" (among other things) but a child can still get by on the bare minimum.

And no I did not buy an animal from the same store or ever state or imply that I did.

And I claimed to understand how the OP feels about seeing Leachianus geckos improperly cared for. I also claimed to not be taking sides because I was just providing everyone with more facts that many people seemed to be ignoring. That is all.

You say, you have a problem with my logic. Look at what you are using as a comparison, and you say my logic is bad. You are comparing a maintenance diet to torture, that is way off base. I bet most people are going to say your logic is way out of line. And you are claiming that a species is not being cares for, this thread is not about a particular species. You are the one who needs to get the facts straight.

I answered your comments in red in your quote. You need to go back and read the original post made by the OP. You are off topic but don't seem to see it. He never said anything about a gecko in the original post. It was only later he brought that up, and I believe it is questionable at best. If he had a problem with a purchase, he would have stated it in the original post.

Originally Posted by StrictlyExotics

Actually, I dont think Jungle Bob needs to prove anything until we have been shown evidence to the contrary. The OP has made one post to defame this Shops reputation without any evidence whatsoever. Jungle Bob has made his claim and has had many character witnesses to speak on their behalf.

I think the OP needs to make his case now.

Sure sure that's your opinion and that's fine, I have no issues. I guess I was just thinking it's odd for Jungle Bob not to have provided proof to defend his reputation, I mean that's what I would have done in the situation - instead of trying to verbally deface and threaten the OP, as well as and accusing the OP of stealing. Do you think that helps his credibility? Because I sure don't.

Originally Posted by aschnell

Sure sure that's your opinion and that's fine, I have no issues. I guess I was just thinking it's odd for Jungle Bob not to have provided proof to defend his reputation, I mean that's what I would have done in the situation - instead of trying to verbally deface and threaten the OP, as well as and accusing the OP of stealing. Do you think that helps his credibility? Because I sure don't.

He should provide to proof for what? The OP stated his case and so did Jungle Bob. If there was actual evidence, I am sure you would see all of us asking Bob to provide his proof otherwise.

As for the verbal "defacing" I cant see where saying someones actions are like a 5 yr old is defacing anyone. Its insulting, but not defacing. What threats are you speaking of? The "accusation" as you take it was an open-ended assumption, not a direct accusation. The only accusation here is the fact that this thread was created.

As with any accusation, I am sure that Jungle Bob and the OP realize that there are consequences anytime a false accusation is made. If I made an accusation in the field I worked in, I had better have had proof or I would have been sued many many times.

Originally Posted by aschnell

Sure sure that's your opinion and that's fine, I have no issues. I guess I was just thinking it's odd for Jungle Bob not to have provided proof to defend his reputation, I mean that's what I would have done in the situation - instead of trying to verbally deface and threaten the OP, as well as and accusing the OP of stealing. Do you think that helps his credibility? Because I sure don't.

Nothing odd about Jungle Bob's responce at all. I think he did just fine. And why can't the OP come on here and respond now that Jungle Bob has spoken? Jungle Bob is a tax paying legitimite business. It sounds like the OP is just a small time want to be who doesn't pay sales tax and other business expences. Maybe he should turn him in.

I responded in blue.

Originally Posted by brd7666

Originally Posted by aschnell
I didn't say the OP doesn't need to provide proof, I just said it was odd that the buisness owner defended his reputation with nothing but words, thats all.

What do you suggest the business owner use to defend himself? When the OP provides proof of his claims, then the store owner should provide more, but until then, I think he did just fine, and so do most of the others here.

I suggested he provide a pay stub proving that Chris indeed worked there, seeing as this "ex-employee" thing seems to be quite the hot topic. Also maybe he could provide pics of his store showing how his animals are cared for and of their enclosures. Again though he doesn't have to at all. I'm just saying if he were to provide proof those things might be nice.
---------------------------------------------------------



Lovely. That is your opinion, no facts though, and again no proof. Maybe you don't care if there are dead animals in a store, but I can assure you many other people do.

I never said that I didn't care. I said it happens and that is a fact. I have been in this business for years, and I have sold to many pet stores. I have seen a dead animal here or there at every store I have ever sold to at one time or another. It sounds to me like, you don't know much about this business.

Nope, I don't own a pet shop. I am an undergraduate Biology student pursuing a career in various fields of gecko related research. I also breed a large number of Rhacodactylus geckos, so that's the area I have a great amount of experience in. I understand the occasional animal dies. But rather than explaining why the animal died, Jungle Bob just said "so-what?". Is that the attitude a pet store owner is supposed to have? I'm deferring to your opinion here because you have more experience.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Again this is your opinion. I provided you with facts about Leachianus growth and health that showed the animal was clearly very very small for it's size (if it was indeed that size when purchased), and provided the fact that a healthy and stress free Leachianus will grow, not stay the same size. And if the animal is not growing (and therefore not healthy) there is only one logical conclusion to draw, which is that the animal is unhealthy.

Just because a reptile does not grow a lot, doesn't mean it isn't healthy. These are reptiles, and in the wild I can assure you, they don't eat anything like we feed them in captivity. Maintenance diets are usually just fine.

The operative word there is "usually". In this case that diet is not fine. I'm assuming you know little or nothing about these geckos, so in matters regarding this species, I have both much more experience as well as the final say. Sorry.

------------------------------------------------------

Sometimes it feels to me like you are using your opinions to break down my argument, which is fine, but it doesn't render you much credibility. Notice how (I feel like I've posted this about 4 times now) the other thread I provided a link to proves nothing except that the animal is now doing well and growing, regardless of where it was first purchased. And I never said otherwise, thank you very much.

Sure, I am using my opinion to break down what you say. I can say this, I have a lot more credibility around here then you do. The link you provided provides this case absolutley nothing. It is completely irrevelent, and of no use to this topic. This topic is not about an animal or even a species of animal. You seem to forget what it is about. I think you need to go back and read the OP's original post, maybe then you will get back on topic.

It's certainly not relevant to the whole topic, but it is relevant to the part of the OPs argument for why he chose to post in the first place.

I am a member on another forum, where all of this started (the TRUE original post thank you very much) and in which I suggested to Chris that he could post here if he wished. And he did so.

So please don't call that thread irrelevant. I have been involved in this for much longer than you, even if it was not on this site.

And yes, you do carry more credibility than I do here. But credibility doesn't always make a person right.
---------------------------------------------------



Well I see a problem with your logic, sorry to say. I really have to disagree with the statement "So they couldn't be doing anything too bad or it would be dead". I will use an extreme example here but torture for interrogational purposes is not designed to kill anyone, yet I think you would agree that is unhealthy. Also not providing your children with adequate amounts of food is considered "bad" (among other things) but a child can still get by on the bare minimum.

And no I did not buy an animal from the same store or ever state or imply that I did.

And I claimed to understand how the OP feels about seeing Leachianus geckos improperly cared for. I also claimed to not be taking sides because I was just providing everyone with more facts that many people seemed to be ignoring. That is all.

You say, you have a problem with my logic. Look at what you are using as a comparison, and you say my logic is bad. You are comparing a maintenance diet to torture, that is way off base. I bet most people are going to say your logic is way out of line. And you are claiming that a species is not being cares for, this thread is not about a particular species. You are the one who needs to get the facts straight.

I was not comparing a maintenance diet to torture (did I say I was?). I was comparing your statement of "So they couldn't be doing anything too bad or it would be dead" to an example which showed that just because a certain something is done to someone or some animal doesn't die - doesn't mean that this certain something wasn't bad for the "someone" or the "some animal". And I said it was an extreme example, but we are dealing with death here so there is no benefit in dumbing everything down.

Would you like a less extreme example? Here you are: Lead poisoning is considered "bad" correct? An animal can get a certain amount of lead in the diet that causes serious health problems, but doesn't kill the animal. If the owner of the animal feeds the animal food that has small amounts of lead in it (even if this is done unknowingly), it's still "bad" for the animal, correct?

And your problem by the way was not with the logic I used, but with the example I used to compare your statement too. That's key.

And with that, I'm done. This has gone far past the point of being ridiculous. I was just trying to defend the virtue of objectivity, that is all. If I don't reply again, it's because this is now a waste of my time.