• 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....

Info *BEWARE* Jim Stelpflug-Questionable Ethics

One good thing did come from this thread. I haven't had to post here in years. I had a old account that I could get into. So I created a new one. Well my old cornsnake friend Rich Z caught that I had this old account. So reconnected in a couple of pm's. Mikie B thank you for the kind words. I would gladly help you out anytime I could. I have running a couple shows here in the Midwest for years. I try to make everyone's experience a good one. If you leave a show with a good experience, and some money if you are a vendor. The drive home seems to be shorter as well
 
Snakesatsunset said:
Also where are the moderators? This dude has posted about an old deal that has its own thread......he ran out of ammunition and using it here....all meanwhile he has no transaction on either. This is not what BOI is for. Boi is a review site....for transactions gone good or gone bad. Not for character opinions, and not for ASSumptions.
Click to expand...

The deliberate use of caps every time you use the word "assume" is getting old and obnoxious. Perhaps even offensive. If you want your posts taken seriously, you mightwant to stop that. Just an opinion.
 
So you made a BOI thread because you were being a dbag on someone's Facebook page and they unfriended you? Wow.

I guess if someone tries to repay a debt to me I'll make sure I'm not FB friends with you first.

Pretty much the worst case of butthurt I've ever seen on fauna. Congrats?
 
Lucille said:
I do not believe providing BOI information about a specific person that one is not involved in a transaction with is against any rule. The moderators themselves post BOI threads about various scammers on the site they have uncovered, for the benefit of the community here.
:
Click to expand...

You're describing an entirely different situation though. Bringing to light an obvious scammer is useful whether you've been scammed by them or not. Jim isn't a scammer and hasn't done anything remotely close to scamming, he just accepted boas as payment on an old debt that he had with someone. I don't know how you could possibly argue that this thread serves any purpose other than making David feel better about getting blocked.
 
MCMB Reptiles said:
You're describing an entirely different situation though. Bringing to light an obvious scammer is useful whether you've been scammed by them or not. Jim isn't a scammer and hasn't done anything remotely close to scamming, he just accepted boas as payment on an old debt that he had with someone. I don't know how you could possibly argue that this thread serves any purpose other than making David feel better about getting blocked.
Click to expand...
Nick, you need to read the post, and realize that it was a response to claim of certain posts being against the rules. Don't make up arguments that I have not made.
 
My point is, recognizing that something is an obvious scam is reason enough to make a BOI post, whether you actually were scammed or not. But just making a post because someone blocked you on Facebook after you were trolling their page for no reason? Come on.
 
MCMB Reptiles said:
My point is, recognizing that something is an obvious scam is reason enough to make a BOI post, whether you actually were scammed or not. But just making a post because someone blocked you on Facebook after you were trolling their page for no reason? Come on.
Click to expand...
Nick, calm down. I was making a response to someone who made a claim about the rules here. You seem determined to create something else out of that. Don't.
 
Uhhh...genuinely confused as to what I said that made it seem I wasn't calm lol. Im literally making a sales ad as I casually respond. Carry on then.
 
Nick, hi. Lucille was responding to my query as to the allowability of this type of post. She was illustrating what 3rd party postings ARE beneficial and so needed...
I understood it as an illustration of the rules for 3rd party posts (which are very well documented) and this one, which, as I said before, is like Romper Room for FB fools.
 
No I understand, I didn't mean it as an attack. I was just pointing out that alerting people to a potential scammer is a far different situation than posting that someone blocked you on Facebook.

I think my post was misinterpreted, Lucille. I wasn't claiming that you were arguing that this post was useful, I was simply (in my own way) saying that posts about scammers actually have utility while this one clearly doesn't. I was merely using your statement as a starting point for my argument, not necessarily as the point I was arguing against. If that makes sense?
 
MCMB Reptiles said:
No I understand, I didn't mean it as an attack. I was just pointing out that alerting people to a potential scammer is a far different situation than posting that someone blocked you on Facebook.

I think my post was misinterpreted, Lucille. I wasn't claiming that you were arguing that this post was useful, I was simply (in my own way) saying that posts about scammers actually have utility while this one clearly doesn't. I was merely using your statement as a starting point for my argument, not necessarily as the point I was arguing against. If that makes sense?
Click to expand...

Well, as always, it depends. Has anyone learned anything from the posts made in this thread? The BOI is not always about black and white labeling someone as a "bad guy" or a "good guy". Sometimes the very content itself will do that for the viewers via unintended consequences. Which, for the BOI itself, can be considered as a "mission accomplished", even if it was clearly not an uncontested field goal for the original author of the thread.

IMHO.
 
WebSlave said:
Well, as always, it depends. Has anyone learned anything from the posts made in this thread? The BOI is not always about black and white labeling someone as a "bad guy" or a "good guy". Sometimes the very content itself will do that for the viewers via unintended consequences. Which, for the BOI itself, can be considered as a "mission accomplished", even if it was clearly not an uncontested field goal for the original author of the thread.

IMHO.
Click to expand...

I have learned something from this thread. Snowflake isn't just a political term. Who get's scammed in this industry? And by who? I don't get scammed any more. Why? I do my homework. I have a feeling that if I ordered something from Jim, I'd be a satisfied customer. Why? Because I'd know the animal wasn't a product of a deal with the likes of Manny or whoever. Why? Because I did my homework. No dog in this race. Good points on both sides. Just sayin'.
 
David, I think you were out of line posting a link about Manny on Jim's personal FB page. I can understand the concern, but a private message probably would have been a lot more appropriate. I know I don't like drama on my own FB page. Maybe Jim just didn't want that kind of debate there? True, he didn't express concern about Manny to you, but as I've said, you kind of attacked him first and even so he was at least polite to you.

Scammers and bad people are the worst, but.....I also hate seeing a decent person get attacked unfairly. I'm not sure that I would say Jim is showing "questionable ethics". Maybe if the thread title said "Jim S - unfriended me on FB because he didn't agree with my post" this would be a more balanced statement.
 
Perhaps I did not approach my initial inquiries in the most tactful manner, that much I admit to. Why? Because frankly I did not care to. Jim is not an actual "friend" of mine, nor do his feelings matter to me, personally. My filter has grown smaller as I have aged, and I tend to call things how I see them. Obviously, people have issue with that. Again, my concern for such things is minuscule at the best of times.

Looks like Jim is again refusing to acknowledge or answer my questions regarding the deal he screwed the pooch on involving the Spectre deal. I wonder why that is?

Why is it that such an alleged outstanding member of the community cannot offer good reason why he stiffed a customer on a trade? Surely if he is as flawless as some claim him to be this should be an easy/quick solution.
 
MCMB Reptiles said:
So you made a BOI thread because you were being a dbag on someone's Facebook page and they unfriended you? Wow.

I guess if someone tries to repay a debt to me I'll make sure I'm not FB friends with you first.

Pretty much the worst case of butthurt I've ever seen on fauna. Congrats?
Click to expand...

You couldn't be further off the mark. "Butthurt" never once played a part.....as I've stated before, I do not know Jim personally, therefore I have absolutely zero emotional investment in my interactions with him. I only made this post after he basically bragged about dealing with known criminals, and thinking to myself "Man, if he deals with people like that knowingly, and TELLS people about it, how would he handle a situation with an unhappy customer?" After I made this thread, I found the post about the deal gone bad with the Spectre trade which seemed to lend a decent amount of credibility to my concern.

I know some people disagree with my motives.....Dan Graybeal expressed those motives/concerns in a very affluent manner earlier in the thread. I find it quite shocking that the point intended is flying over the heads of so many folks posting here. I only hope the interpretation is not lost on those who read but may not comment here.
 
Your interpretation of the conversation and events and reality are not coinciding with one another. You tried making a big deal out of something that's literally insignificant.

Should he have refused Manny repaying him because after they had done business, Manny screwed people over? Is that what would have made him a good guy? I don't understand what you think he should have done in that situation. Are you claiming he's no longer entitled to what's owed to him just because the other party did bad things? Your argument makes absolutely no sense.
 
DavidBeard said:
After I made this thread, I found the post about the deal gone bad with the Spectre trade which seemed to lend a decent amount of credibility to my concern.
Click to expand...

I just want to make sure we clarify this little nugget. Your "concern", as you put it, is that because Jim has done business in the past with people who ended up doing bad things, that Jim must be a bad guy himself. Despite there being zero evidence of this, and a multitude of people saying the exact opposite. Ok.

So somehow, a deal gone bad on a specter lends credibility to your claim that Jim dealing with people who later do bad things makes him bad. Brock Wagner was the person who gave Jim the specter that turned out to be a YB. So are you saying Brock Wagner is a bad guy to watch out for? I'm sure Brock would love to discuss that claim with you, as it's a pretty wild accusation to make based on absolutely nothing.
 
Back
Top