• 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....

Bill Leverton SCAMMER beware

Well aparently the "dickhead move" was not the violation of privacy, since it would have been ok if Dennis had betrayed Bill's trust and violated his privacy by posting.
 
"There are times when the public has a right to know that supercedes someone else's concern for privacy."

I think it is a fine line that determines this, and that the line is often very blurry. However, I do agree that this was one of those times. Two of my favorite sayings come to mind. The first one being, Knowledge is power, and the second is ignorance is bliss. I do understand Sam's concerns, but when I look at the whole situation, I personally, am glad that Davey did post the e-mail. That being said, I think his "did it for fun" remark (while maybe only joking) did not serve to add to his credibility at that time.
 
Was I lacking credibility at that time? I didn't have the desire to write out a post as long as Jim O's about why he would have done the same thing. He posted it, and basically gave all the reasons I would have If I were asked why I did it. I thought for sure that the shrugging, and the poking emoticon was a dead give away that my reason for posting was not just because I thought it would be fun. Why would I think it would be fun to post anyway?
 
Hmmmm, let's see if I can put this thing to bed in one post, not likely, but lets see...

Chamco said:
My only problem is that you said in one post that it wasn't personal, and yet you used the work "dickhead", whether to describe the individual, or that it was a "dickhead post".
Click to expand...

Jim, actually, the comment I believe I made when leaving the points was "Dickhead move", I was referrring to the action of posting an e-mail in which he was not the intended recipient, not to him or his post.



DaveyFig said:
I thought that it was that fact that I shared an email that was privately sent to others that made my posting it wrong. I thought the violation of privacy was the issue.
As I thought I explained in our e-mails, the "issue" was that I didn't think it was your place to post the e-mail because it wasn't yours to post.

I'm not going to waste 5 pages defending my actions, or my choice of words when i gave the rep points. It wasn't anything personal, I read the post, I thought it was a "dickhead" move to post it, I said as much, I moved on and didn't think any more of it until I saw your post about receiving the comment. When I realized you didn't know who it was from, I stepped up and took ownership of the comment. Had D. Thomas, Webslave or anyone else that wasn't one of the intended recipients posted the e-mail, I would have made the same comment.

I chose the rep point area to let you know what I thought because I was too lazy to take the extra clicks to open the user cp to PM or e-mail you. I could have just made a post telling you what I thought, but didn't feel like publicly defending how I felt, regarding the posting of the e-mail, when really the issue was between you and I not you and I and all of Fauna. Regardless, i did it, I don't regret it, and I'm moving on...

Unless you guys feel like discussing it amongst yourselves for the next 10 pages then you all should move on as well, I'm done talking about the subject. :)
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
"Was I lacking credibility at that time?"

After you wrote the "did it for fun" post, I would have to yes I think that(more specifically) your motives possibly lost some credibility to some (atleast one).

"I didn't have the desire to write out a post as long as Jim O's about why he would have done the same thing. He posted it, and basically gave all the reasons I would have If I were asked why I did it."

Again, I am glad you did it, and I was just trying to throw you a little moral support. I am just saying I think your comment afterwards did not help you, and may have been misinterpreted by some.

"I thought for sure that the shrugging, and the poking emoticon was a dead give away that my reason for posting was not just because I thought it would be fun."

I understand, and I got the joke. However it did catch me off gaurd for a second at first.

"Why would I think it would be fun to post anyway?"

I cannot speak for you, but some people kinda get off on that sort of thing. That being said, I do not think that this was the case with you. I just think it was one of those jokes that gets told that does not go over as well as the teller planned it to.
 
"Unless you guys feel like discussing it amongst yourselves for the next 10 pages then you all should move on as well, I'm done talking about the subject."

Fair enough.
 
Come on fellas, this is getting way off topic. If you all must debate the ethics of posting that email please start a thread about it elswhere and let this thread remain directly about Bill and Lee.
 
Well, to me the people who responded that the email was in fact the one that they received lent more credibility to my post than the joke took away.Those who didn't get the email, but posted that they would have posted as well, and their reasoning added even more.
I could have just copied and pasted Jim's post, and been done with it I guess. He did say most of what I was thinking. I was actually typing up a post about my reasoning when Jim's post popped up. I just quoted it, and added my joke rather than retyping everything he said in different words. I scrapped my post, and used his, with a little jab attatched.
 
Gentle men

Don't you all think that's it's time to put this baby to bed? Untill Lee has anything to add, this thread should be locked down again. How about it Mod's??
 
Considering the disappointment and anguish the reasons for this thread brought to many of us, there's something poetic about pulling the words "Bill Leverton Scammer" back to the top of the BOI. But my reason for this post is to address any earlier readers/posters here who had an interest in the "banning" discussion. At Dennis' correct urging, it was taken to the ADMIN area:

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70591

It was referenced a couple of times earlier in this thread, but only a masochist would want to dig here for it. Its only nine pages at this time, and likely won't run much more. Rich (Webslave) has taken time to explain Fauna's position there, not just with regards to Bill, but more generically to "banning" as a practice. For those interested.

Jim Flaherty
The Chameleon Company, LLC
 
Chamco said:
Considering the disappointment and anguish the reasons for this thread brought to many of us, there's something poetic about pulling the words "Bill Leverton Scammer" back to the top of the BOI. But my reason for this post is to address any earlier readers/posters here who had an interest in the "banning" discussion. At Dennis' correct urging, it was taken to the ADMIN area:

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70591

It was referenced a couple of times earlier in this thread, but only a masochist would want to dig here for it. Its only nine pages at this time, and likely won't run much more. Rich (Webslave) has taken time to explain Fauna's position there, not just with regards to Bill, but more generically to "banning" as a practice. For those interested.

Jim Flaherty
The Chameleon Company, LLC
Click to expand...

Jim, You know I luv ya but its easy to find, been there for a whole day, its on the front page of fauna everytime someone post a reply to it, its been there for all who wanted to see.

I don't think there is anything "poetic" about any of this. Escially BUMPING this to the top to direct people to a thread they already knew was there.

And page 9, Jim where are you on fauna options, I am on page 2 with post #43, we got along ways to go to get to page 9 if yous et you fauna options to a differentpost per page!
 
dragonflyreptiles said:
And page 9, Jim where are you on fauna options, I am on page 2 with post #43, we got along ways to go to get to page 9 if yous et you fauna options to a differentpost per page!
Click to expand...
Wendy darlin, I have mine at 40/page like you. Evidently Jim has the Fauna default which is many fewer. That thread is a "manageable" 43 posts. :hot:
 
Jim O, probably just settings for Chamco cause I know he is a great guy but I hate when people day page 9, page 10, page 50 and Im still on page 1, 2 or 8, if you want to talk about pages know the options of your forum and stop spilling silly sentences that do NOT apply to all members on the board.
 
Hang tough Wendy. I am with you on this subject. I can't add anything to your comments at this point. Well done and brave! Thank You!!!! :cool:
 
I know one person that we should NOT ask! (cough, Bill!) Maybe his Boa ate them and he is waiting for them to reappear!
 
No that's not it....

They escaped through a hole in the box. Much like his holier than thou right wing signature about welfare and building permits.

By the way, this thread is 5 miles long and nobody has commented on the snarky way Bill treated other scammers. Since this dead horse is so old, do a search on his other posts and see hypocrisy in action.

Learn it, know it, avoid it.
 
Ophis said:
What gives with Levertons missing Avatar and "0" number on his rep points?
Click to expand...

The Avatar went shortly after you made this post:

Ophis said:
Or at least stripped of his Avatar....Its too noble an majestic for a scammer to use.
Click to expand...

My guess is he removed it. I highly doubt Rich or any of the Mods would have removed it. The "0" rep power would have to have been done by Rich or one of the Mods. If it was done at Bill's request or not is yet to be answered.
 
I did send the E-mail But as time moved on I decided, The Hell with it you people never wanted the true you wanted something to chew on so.You have what you have.on another note some of you people really do need to move on. And if there is any other thing you need to know. In my GGC there is an address feel free to stop by and we can discuss it over a couple of beers
 
Back
Top