• 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....

BOI Grand Jury

bwt501

bwt501

New member
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
146
Reaction score
20
Points
0
Location
Richmond , NY
In light of many recent premature and unwarranted Bad Guy posts on the BOI, perhaps a Grand Jury like system in where a committee of appointed individuals privately pre-screens the complaint to determine if it merits elevation to the public forum. This committee would not judge or deliberate, just deem it legitimate to proceed. Its standards can be extremely lenient so as to not refuse even the most minor of wrongs, however it would still have enough teeth to prevent obvious nonsense from becoming a public black eye for the recipient. It would also force a built in cool-down period, which we have seen resolves many issues and non-issues. This idea obviously can be altered or modified to fit the needs of the site, but I think something along these lines would alleviate much of the problems posed here lately.
 
bwt501 said:
In light of many recent premature and unwarranted Bad Guy posts on the BOI, perhaps a Grand Jury like system in where a committee of appointed individuals privately pre-screens the complaint to determine if it merits elevation to the public forum. This committee would not judge or deliberate, just deem it legitimate to proceed. Its standards can be extremely lenient so as to not refuse even the most minor of wrongs, however it would still have enough teeth to prevent obvious nonsense from becoming a public black eye for the recipient. It would also force a built in cool-down period, which we have seen resolves many issues and non-issues. This idea obviously can be altered or modified to fit the needs of the site, but I think something along these lines would alleviate much of the problems posed here lately.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure such a group would work here. The way it works now is that anyone can bring their claims/experiences here and readers can judge for themselves.
Many claims have validity, some do not.

Usually spiteful or baseless claims get ferretted out quickly by readers and there is value there, because the community can also choose whether they further trust or would want to do business with the spitemonger.

There are indeed premature claims, where there would be no issue if the parties worked together, but isn't that itself a valuable piece of information for readers? I would not want to do business with someone who cannot even try to work out any differences or problems, whether it be with a buyer or seller.

Deliberate bearers of spiteful tales or lies may find, and justifiably so, that fewer people want to buy or sell from them in the future, which in many cases sort of self polices the process since readers are apt to be merciless with someone who lies just to step on another's good reputation.

In addition, the appointed individuals and the appointer would come under fire as, inevitably, the group moves to another site to air their grievance and cast aspersions on any no bill. There would be charges of favoritism, crony capitalism, and all manner of insults hurled by either side at the committee's members and one side or the other would then loudly disagree with the committee's decision.
 
Point taken. Then perhaps the"Bad Guy" title and red-X can be voted on. The complaint can be presented as usual but the title would have to be approved. I think this is the biggest gripe, the permanent stigma even though the thread played out in the recipients favor.
 
bwt501 said:
Point taken. Then perhaps the"Bad Guy" title and red-X can be voted on. The complaint can be presented as usual but the title would have to be approved. I think this is the biggest gripe, the permanent stigma even though the thread played out in the recipients favor.
Click to expand...

Voted on by who? Does that mean the party with the most friends (voters) wins? If the voters are an appointed panel, you have the same problems as the committee idea, above.
I see your point, and I empathize, but the current system although not perfect, works. I think many who use the threads to decide whether to do business with a certain individual do read the thread through, I certainly would.
 
It would be a great idea if we weren't working with kids and crazies (not that all kids are bad, some are more mature than the adults). By, as Lucille said, sometimes a totally baseless claim by the OP tells us not to deal with him/her, as well as proving that the 'accused' will go over and above to make thing rights in the event of an honest mistake.

Noelle
 
I dont think a committee to decide what gets on the BOI is a good idea. The whole ideal BOI is that anyone regardless of status in the hobby can bring a complaint to the BOI. If it's meritless or ridiculous, it shows the hobby about the OP. If it's a legitimate complaint, it informs the hobby about the 'bad guy'.

A committee would either have to approve every BOI post to go through, or it becomes a popularity contest where anything not sent through is brought up as a "you're just friends with them!" complaint. Also, that would be judging, as in judging what is worthy of a bad guy red flag or not.

Popularity contests have little to do with reality or justice at times. The BOI is normally all about proof, and without any proof, or with a petty complaint, the OP is usually shown as a bad guy themselves.
 
I'm sure volunteers for such a task would evaporate once it is pointed out to them that they can be held legally liable for any thread they judge as being worthy of a BAD GUY label and then posted publicly. That's how we now dodge that liability. We don't filter what is posted on the BOI. Once you do so, you run the risk of legally becoming a co-author of what anyone else may post that you allow through that filter. You are, in effect, agreeing with the poster of the thread, and judging as a FACT that what they are posting is the truth.

And no, such a task could not be done by a group of anonymous persons. Because then that liability mentioned above would default to ME as admin of this site. :NoNo:
 
I've yet to read a BOI thread where I can't, all by myself, figure out who the bad guy is, if there is one. I certainly don't need a "super-committee" to decide for me if a BadGuy post is warranted or not. In the long run, every thread on here teaches me something about both the OP and the subject of the thread... and often some of the other respondents. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
Lucille said:
Voted on by who? Does that mean the party with the most friends (voters) wins? If the voters are an appointed panel, you have the same problems as the committee idea, above.
I see your point, and I empathize, but the current system although not perfect, works. I think many who use the threads to decide whether to do business with a certain individual do read the thread through, I certainly would.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. The group of judges could be made up of new members. They could take a test. Then after, say, 2 month's, they could be replaced with fresh judges.
 
What if the original poster and the target of the post agreed along with at least one moderator that the post was premature or not warranted? Then, they would contact a second moderator and the post could be removed. In this manner, the complainant, the object of the complaint and a moderator have to agree that the post was unnecessary. The moderator can be just a rubber stamp to ensure that there is no payoff to remove a post.

Hopefully, there can be a solution because it really looks bad when someone gets pages of comments and the thread is not necessary and even the OP admits it. These premature or unwarranted posts really could hurt an innocent person because not everyone doing a search is going to read all of the threads. They will just see "bad guy" with a bunch of pages and assume that the person is a scammer.

There also seems to be an unusual amount of unwarranted posts lately. It seems like anyone who just doesn't like someone else is now starting bad guy threads. This is supposed to be about business transactions, not a popularity contest.
 
Anybody with a real interest is going to read enough of the thread to see if is premature or umfounded. Again I say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
Yeah.... I would think that anyone considering spending their hard earned money with someone with one or more threads in the BOI is going to read ALL they can before plunking down their money. Regardless of the length of those threads. GOOD GUY threads have turned bad on the target and BAD GUY threads have turned completely around as REAL evidence was provided.

Quite honestly, I think it would be rather foolish of someone having the resources provided here to NOT use it to it's fullest to help them with their buying and selling decisions.
 
vadiver said:
What if the original poster and the target of the post agreed along with at least one moderator that the post was premature or not warranted? Then, they would contact a second moderator and the post could be removed. In this manner, the complainant, the object of the complaint and a moderator have to agree that the post was unnecessary. The moderator can be just a rubber stamp to ensure that there is no payoff to remove a post.

Hopefully, there can be a solution because it really looks bad when someone gets pages of comments and the thread is not necessary and even the OP admits it. These premature or unwarranted posts really could hurt an innocent person because not everyone doing a search is going to read all of the threads. They will just see "bad guy" with a bunch of pages and assume that the person is a scammer.

There also seems to be an unusual amount of unwarranted posts lately. It seems like anyone who just doesn't like someone else is now starting bad guy threads. This is supposed to be about business transactions, not a popularity contest.
Click to expand...

:iagree: with this 100%!!!

Yes I have read this entire thread, and I see the point that everyone is making, but let's face it. We can already see that the reptile hobby is seeing a major increase in young people, and not only that, but with the way things have been going for the last 5 years at the least, Americans are lazy...they WON'T take the time to read the bad guy posts about someone. They just see the red and turn away. And what do young people hate to do because they were forced to all throughout school? READ!

How do I know this? Well, I'm 19 years old. Not ashamed of it. I HATE to read. When it comes to where my money is going I certainly care to read through every post in a BOI thread though.
However, the 16, 17, and possibly even younger members of the site are not all on the same mindset, and if I were someone falsely accused and was losing business as a result from that I would be pretty upset.

I agree, if it aint broke, don't fix it...
But in my (and at least one other person's opinion) this is something that we'd like to see fixed.

If the accuser admits to making a "hot headed" accusation, false accusation, and so on, why CAN'T that thread be deleted? After all, isn't it just taking up space that could be used for better things??
 
the gecko geek said:
If the accuser admits to making a "hot headed" accusation, false accusation, and so on, why CAN'T that thread be deleted? After all, isn't it just taking up space that could be used for better things??
Click to expand...
How many times do we see something to the effect of "I'll make this right for you as soon as you delete that thread"?
What is the value of a review system if the reviews get deleted?
How would we justify to all the people that want threads deleted why we will remove some...but not theirs?
What's wrong with being responsible/accountable for what one posts online?
I thought one of the things that set this site,and the BOI, apart is that we don't just delete threads.
What about the benefit of seeing how people respond in these situations...I know I've decided not to sell to some people because of how they've gone after other sellers for minor issues (or even problems that they -the buyers- caused themselves).
 
Back
Top