• 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....

Is the Fall From Grace fatal to the Good Guy Certs?

What do you think...?

  • Good Guy Certification is irrevocably destroyed by the "Bad Guy" actions

    Votes: 2 4.9%

  • Good Guy Certification doesn't mean anything.

    Votes: 10 24.4%

  • I don't think anything has changed.

    Votes: 6 14.6%

  • I think that the Good Guy Certification program is just great.

    Votes: 2 4.9%

  • The Good Guy Certification Program has DONE IT'S JOB

    Votes: 20 48.8%

  • The Good Guy Certification Program is the best part of the BOI

    Votes: 1 2.4%
  • Total voters
    41
  • Poll closed .
And this isn't about NERD as it is a moot issue since there will more than likely be no email from them explaining their actions or any changes which might take place, but I am sure NH Fish and Game will ;) . This is purely about a flawed system which as Karen stated will allow those not directly related to business transactions to vote in a positive or negative way thus effecting that person/business's "Good Guy" rank. Those who screamed at David for doing the same some are now doing really need to look into this a little deeper because it is looking like it is a do as I say and not as I do type of forum.
 
You're wrong Brian.

You have to look at WHO it is that you are relying on to give you information about someone else. Do what you think is right, good or bad. When people see that THEY can decide whether or not to give YOUR opinion any weight at all.

It may be a somewhat longer process than one would like but if you don't know all the names they can be looked up and researched and then you have THAT background to help you decide whether or not to agree with people.

So I don't think it's as you say. I think it's do as you will but be ready to back it up.
 
After some thought let me attempt to explain what is going through my mind as to this good guy/bad guy thing. We're talking about my vote with respect to Bill Leverton and David's vote with respect to NERD.

A vote in that poll should relate to the business ethics of the party involved. If it was limited to people who had done business with Bill the vote might be 10-1 in his favor and he is a lying, stealing scumbag. That poll is meant as a "can you confidently do business with this party?" Well...let's take Bill first because he is easy. Bill is an admitted thief. He stole a snake and then tried to peddle it. And then lied about it. And he admits he is a scumbag. Not a tough choice. He gets a :toiletcla sign and a "bad guy".

What NERD did was as dumbass as it comes, but it does not rise to the level of "they cannot be trusted to give you what you pay for or to honestly do business with". It was dumb, some might call it criminal, but it in no way impugned, say, the value of a Ball Python or Blood Python that someone might buy from them. So, for the UMPTEENTH time, yes I am outraged at what I saw in those pictures (there Karen, I have said it YET AGAIN) but in my opinion it is not a reflection of their business ethics, just a reflection of bad judgement, perhaps stupidity.

And that is why I voted Bill a bad guy, and think that NERD does not deserve the same, and did not deserve it from David. David made his point, put a stain on NERD's reputation. Spread enough chum so the sharks from elsewhere all descended here and chewed them up to no end and that is sufficient.

And now as for the personal comments Karen, if and when you can get off that high horse you are on where you hold me to some ridiculous standard and accuse me of being a hypocrite and condoning what was in those pictures, and being a doctor who won't admit I am wrong...when you can come down and talk, I will happily retract my statement and make amends. Until then, leave me out of your tirades. I really am not interested in more fighting on this subject.
 
wilomn said:
No. THIS thread is about whether or not the Certification Program can function when one of it's members looses his certification. Are we able to police our own sufficiently to keep the respect of the general public type of thing.
Click to expand...


Not by allowing people who HAVEN'T DONE BUSINESS WITH others to give negative or positive points on a whim because it is a popular concept at that time. That is just a "Jump on the bandwagon" type of poor judgement.
 
That's still weak Wes... According to that logic anyone that disagrees with what they did can STILL give NERD neg points here... and who can argue the fact?
 
You have to decide to whom you give CREDIT enough to listen to their opinion.

If Joe Dipthog says Greg Riso is a scumbag and gives him neg. rep points and a badguy rating I, meaning me myself, have to decide whether or NOT I'll believe what Joe Dipthong had to say.

Once I have decided whether or not I CARE what someone has said THEN I can determine if further action is needed by me. If I don't believe what they say, then what does it matter WHAT they say?

When gubitz vouches for sal what do you guys think?

That's what I'm talking about. Consider the source before you decide whether or not to believe what that source has said.
 
A vote in that poll should relate to the business ethics of the party involved. If it was limited to people who had done business with Bill the vote might be 10-1 in his favor and he is a lying, stealing scumbag. That poll is meant as a "can you confidently do business with this party?"

What NERD did was as dumbass as it comes, but it does not rise to the level of "they cannot be trusted to give you what you pay for or to honestly do business with".
Click to expand...

That's a nice esoteric division, but how well will that hold up in actual practice? How can you insure that there won't be more grey areas in the future?

What's called for here is quite simple. In a case like this, in the face of outstanding evidence of this sort of thievery and obvious bad business - a special vote of no confidence should be held that allows the people of Fauna to act as a jury in matters like this... one at a time.
 
Jim tried to agrue the fact, but based upon ethics what NERD did would be wrong also. Showboating venomoids around at an educational show placing innocent people in danger. If that is high ethics I quit this herp community. Ethics can cover a very broad spectrum and not be limited to fair business practices.

So Bill admitted he was a lying cheating scumball. At least he had a pair to admit to being in the wrong unlike some here. Do I agree with Bill's plight? No not at all, a theif is a theif and needs to be treated as such. Was this gone about in the wrong manner? Yes. Why not just pull the good guy certification when he admitted to being a theif and be done with it? Maybe because it would have taken away from other members twisted method of amusement..
 
You have to decide to whom you give CREDIT enough to listen to their opinion.
Click to expand...

Nerd admitted to doing something that is percieved as very poor judgement. Such poor judgement that some may decide to never do business with them again! Should the masses be able to just vote thier feelings and strip away thier Good Guy cert in the light of such evidence? Or should it remain true only to the business applications like Jim said?
 
CaptainSlackass said:
Nerd admitted to doing something that is percieved as very poor judgement. Such poor judgement that some may decide to never do business with them again! Should the masses be able to just vote thier feelings and strip away thier Good Guy cert in the light of such evidence? Or should it remain true only to the business applications like Jim said?
Click to expand...

We each have to decide tha.t. We have to decide it both for ourselves and who we comment about as well as who we believe when they say so and so is good or bad.

Each of us has to make that decision individually.
 
I originally posted this in another thread and just realized it. I think this will help explain what I mean.

wilomn said:
I have good guy for several people I have not done business with.

My word has value. It has value to me but, it seems that it also has value to others. IF I go out on a limb and say that I think someone is a good guy when I have NOT done business with them, I am in essense saying that I am SO sure of them that I will put MY personal reputation on the line and say so publickly, I will back their reputation by putting mine on the line for them as well.

That is the gage I used to determine who I would and would not vote for. I never voted either way for Bill because I don't know him well enough to vouch for him. I've got nothing for nor anything against him. Or should say HAD nothing against him.

I still want to know why or why you won't tell me why, Bill.
Click to expand...
 
Each of us has to make that decision individually.
Click to expand...


Well then we're right back where we started... there are people out there who think that NERD should lose their Cert because of what happened. Is that fair? I'm not sure - but it's a damn important issue don't you think?
 
CaptainSlackass said:
Well then we're right back where we started... there are people out there who think that NERD should lose their Cert because of what happened. Is that fair? I'm not sure - but it's a damn important issue don't you think?
Click to expand...

Let them vote. You vote. Once the votes are sufficient to tilt the scale one way or the other then you have your answer. Until then, you don't.
 
Ok Wes let me put this into terms you can understand very well. Say some really big name breeder decides Neil is a great guy and ads to his good guy certification without doing business with him. You mean to tell me that would be ok? And you also mean to tell me you wouldn't go nuts because of it and run around whining to anyone who would listen?

And I only use this example because I know you to don't see eye to eye. What would your gut reaction be if this happened? honestly Wes..

And isn't it a form of fraud misleading the public by just giving someone good guy points just because you feel they won't do something fishy? Doesn't that in and upon itself render this whole thing useless?
 
That's your opinion. I respect that. But think about it... say a few people have a genuine problem with what happened and the vote negative. And then a whole avalanche of people who feel like they got a bad rap vote positive... it's no different than a company wide reputation system and it's completely watered down what it was intended to be.

The answer isn't simple, but it has to address grey area's. That's why I say that a vote of no confidence should be held only under certain circumstances that would allow an occasional mass voting.
 
So Wes, If Joe Dipthong were a bad guy, and he had some sort of issue with you, the best thing he could do to hurt you is to give you a good guy vote?Then when people checked his background they would see what kind of people support you?
I don't think most people are going to consider the source, if it means they have to look up the reasons for 75 bad guy votes, or 75 good guy votes. The numbers alone are going to sway most people.
If you had 3 votes total, it might be worth checking the background of each voter before making a decision, but sheer numbers are going to have more of an impact that a name in fine print in a list of 50+ votes.
I think that for the cert to work, only people who have had transactions with the delaer should be able to vote. That way, it keeps voters to a minimum, which requires less research, and isn't that what the good guy cert is about? BOI Lite, remember?
 
Such a system would allow an obvious bad guy like Bill to be taken down in the light of inscrutable evidence. A situation like NERDS could also be voted on, because there is also inscrutable evidence. Bill is a no-brainer. NERD probably would emerge from a vote like that - but maybe not. Think about it.
 
Only people who have actually had a transaction with the person should be able to vote. Otherwise we're back to the point where someone can have all their friends log on and vote for them and it would be totally bogus and have nothing at all to do with business.

Also NERD had this show at their Zoo Creatures Pet Store so it was business related. Letting little kids pet cobras probably drummed up a lot of business for them both days they did it.
 
Basicly you really can't have a system wherein people without business history can vote on this sort of thing whenever they feel like it. It'll be pure anarchy.
 
Back
Top