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

[WebSlave]

You side stepped my question, Wes. So I will ask it again.

Did the rules say, before Bill signed up, that it would be here for Life? Or is that being added after the fact?

ANY rule change that happens AFTER signing up should include the option of withdrawing from the program. One may not have signed up if those rules were in place to begin with.

How can there be a rule change if there was nothing specified about it at all from the beginning? Quite frankly, based on most people's understanding of the permanent nature of things posted on the BOI, I think anyone pondering this point about this issue would likely have considered that the certification thread would perhaps be permanent as well. It certainly would be logically consistent with how the BOI is run, wouldn't it?

Basically it was undefined, in my opinion. There is nothing that said I had to do ANYTHING either way.

Personally, my gut feeling is that a permanent record may be much more of an incentive for participants to try real hard to remain good guys. Shouldn't that REALLY be the goal of this program anyway? Or do people only want to use it as a type of advertising for themselves, but only if things are going well for them? As long as they are doing good business, they want their name associated with the program, but if they fumble the ball, they then want it swept under the rug?

And someone here is claiming they will NOT participate in the program BECAUSE of the permanent nature of it (if it does in fact go that way)? Personally, I would sincerely HOPE that anyone applying for this certificate would actually BE a good guy and plan on remaining that way. Quite frankly, if you have any doubts about your ability to be able to make that grade, I would just as soon not have you in this program anyway. I really don't want anyone possibly USING this certification system to further their own agenda who has no real intentions, nor dedication, to be someone all the other participants (myself included) would like to be associated with.

So yeah, if you don't think you can make the grade PERMANENTLY. then please, don't bother to apply. I would imagine that none of us already participating really want you here anyway.

 

[shrap]

How can there be a rule change if there was nothing specified about it at all from the beginning? Quite frankly, based on most people's understanding of the permanent nature of things posted on the BOI, I think anyone pondering this point about this issue would likely have considered that the certification thread would perhaps be permanent as well. It certainly would be logically consistent with how the BOI is run, wouldn't it?

Basically it was undefined, in my opinion. There is nothing that said I had to do ANYTHING either way.

Personally, my gut feeling is that a permanent record may be much more of an incentive for participants to try real hard to remain good guys. Shouldn't that REALLY be the goal of this program anyway? Or do people only want to use it as a type of advertising for themselves, but only if things are going well for them? As long as they are doing good business, they want their name associated with the program, but if they fumble the ball, they then want it swept under the rug?

And someone here is claiming they will NOT participate in the program BECAUSE of the permanent nature of it (if it does in fact go that way)? Personally, I would sincerely HOPE that anyone applying for this certificate would actually BE a good guy and plan on remaining that way. Quite frankly, if you have any doubts about your ability to be able to make that grade, I would just as soon not have you in this program anyway. I really don't want anyone possibly USING this certification system to further their own agenda who has no real intentions, nor dedication, to be someone all the other participants (myself included) would like to be associated with.

So yeah, if you don't think you can make the grade PERMANENTLY. then please, don't bother to apply. I would imagine that none of us already participating really want you here anyway.

The first part I agree with..... The last part is nothing more than a low blow and an attempt to discredit me. Pretty sad.

My only point is that the rules should be made clear ahead of time. That is all I have said over and over and you want to twist it into a reason to question my integrity. Wow. I have done nothing to deserve that in any way. I have done nothing but support you and this site. I have followed the rules and do my best to treat people with respect and common courtesy. They way I was raised. And you plant seeds of doubt about my integrity. Un****ingbelievable.

 

[Jim O]

Sammy, I don't think that was meant as anything more than a bit of a dig, not specifically about your integrity. That's how I read it anyway, for what it's worth.

 

[Wilomn]

Though I speak for no one but myself, were I to venture an opinion on Rich's last paragraph, which I am about to do, I would say, were I to say anything at all, which by my previous admission I am about to do, I would say that it was meant to apply specifically to Shrap but was meant as more of punch on the shoulder type of thing as opposed to a slap in he face.

Yeah, I think Rich meant it to you, Shrap, but I don't think he was REALLY questioning anything about you.

I certainly have no question about your ethics or anything else and I would seriously doubt that anyone else does either.

 

[WebSlave]

Check your last posts, Sammy, and see how many times you referred to this certification program of mine as "crap". Then check out that little dig you made about me in how I could frivolously change the rules as I saw fit.

That is total crap. The infamous 60 foot turd. Allow me to quote YOU, "The rules should be plain and FOLLOWED."

And in this case they sure as hell aint plain, and they sure as hell should not be changed after signing up without the option of leaving the program. You can not define the rules as we go along without giving people the option of leaving the program.

I know this following statement is over the top, but I am saying it to emphasize my point. If you can't leave after you sign up, no mater what rules are changed, then Rich can add a new rule that all GGC members have to send him 10% of all their sales. Wanna quit? Too damn bad!!! PAY ME!!!! Not gonna pay? Then you get a Red Cert for being a bad guy...

ANY rule change that happens AFTER signing up should include the option of withdrawing from the program. One may not have signed up if those rules were in place to begin with.

Sorry, bub, but it appears to me that YOU have just made an assumption about how things should run in the program AFTER the fact yourself, and are getting all pissy over the fact that your desires are just not gospel around here. And it is pretty damned obvious that you are now taking to lashing out at everyone who disagrees with you over it. So don't look all surprised and righteously offended that I decided to tweak your nose a bit.

 

[shrap]

Check your last posts, Sammy, and see how many times you referred to this certification program of mine as "crap". Then check out that little dig you made about me in how I could frivolously change the rules as I saw fit.



Sorry, bub, but it appears to me that YOU have just made an assumption about how things should run in the program AFTER the fact yourself, and are getting all pissy over the fact that your desires are just not gospel around here. And it is pretty damned obvious that you are now taking to lashing out at everyone who disagrees with you over it. So don't look all surprised and righteously offended that I decided to tweak your nose a bit.

Why don't YOU take a look at my posts.... I never said the program was crap. NOT ONE TIME. I said that changing the rules after people sign up would be crap. As in not being fair. I never called the program crap at all. If you look at the second post (oops, the third post) in this thread.... yep that is me defending it.

As far as a dig at you about frivolously changing rules, well if you read that post you would see that I started that paragraph by saying "I know this following statement is over the top". I think I made it clear that it was not in any way meant as a reality or what I thought was real.

I have not made a single assumption. I have just been offering my opinions. I thought that was what this was all about. The free flowing exchange of ideas.

And I have not gotten pissy at all in this thread until your undeserved low blow. I had done nothing but have a normal conversation with people until then. And I have no expectations from you or anyone else on this site, so where you get off saying that ("and are getting all pissy over the fact that your desires are just not gospel around here.") is beyond me and could not be further from the truth. Are just making this crap up as you go? Or are you just so used to people riding you over your decisions that it has become a paranoia for you? That you see it in every post even when it is not there? Sorry dude, but when it comes to me that tired line does not apply and is completely unfounded.

I have not lashed out at a single person. Not a single one. Again, do you just make this crap up as you go? Because to say that is purely fiction. Completely make believe on your part. I have done nothing but have a normal conversation in this thread up until your last two posts. And yes I am rightfully offended, because everything you have said towards me is not true. A total figment of your imagination.

I will humbly accept your apology and write this off as a misunderstanding when ever you are ready to give it.

 

[WebSlave]

OK now I have a question, from this post its #4 on this page
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/showpost.php?p=236588&postcount=2

Saying that:
"If the results of the poll and/or the Trader Rating associated with your registered member name on FaunaClassifieds.com indicates a negative rating, and investigation by the Admin and/or moderators of FaunaClassifieds cannot determine clear evidence of fraudulent ratings on said poll and Rating, you specifically agree to remove the banner certificate code and/or the certificate banner graphic from your site immediately upon request."


What would be considered fraudulent ratings?

"Fraudulent", in this context would mean someone who is discovered who has registered multiple times, regardless of the paid membership requirement, in order to place votes for or against someone in order to influence the outcome of the poll. Personally I can envision someone thinking that $100 to register 10 new member names and pay the membership fee would be well worth it to ding someone out of the certification program, or perhaps give themselves 10 positive votes in order to get themselves out of the red. This is a possibility that has to be considered, and is the reason it is mentioned specifically.

 

[dragonflyreptiles]

Thanks Rich, that is what I as thinking but didn't want to assume any interpretation.

 

[WebSlave]

Just a side note here. I have had 6 new applications for certification recently. Unfortunately I ran out of the graphics images I had made up for the individual certifications, and am trying to find time to create a new batch. Please be patient, as this is right in my busy season and time is really stretched pretty tightly.

Thanks.

 

[Milwaukee Reptiles]

Hey Rich,
If you end up making all new images for all the certificates, I have one suggestion: make the image a little smaller. Not a lot, but maybe down to within a 150px by 150px square. Such a thing would really help out when trying to find a place for it on my site. Or perhaps even two images, one just with "_small" attached to it for the footer on inner pages (if you have some software to do this automatically). I don't really expect you to do anything like that by hand, that'd be insane! Again, just a suggestion.

 

[Matt Haines]

Just a side note here. I have had 6 new applications for certification recently. Unfortunately I ran out of the graphics images I had made up for the individual certifications, and am trying to find time to create a new batch. Please be patient, as this is right in my busy season and time is really stretched pretty tightly.

Thanks.

I have plenty of time. Anytime is better then not at all.

 

[hhmoore]

Let me add my $.02 worth

I don't make a habit of posting to threads in which I haven't fully brought myself up to speed (done it once before, several of you know which one), but I just don't have time to read all 59 pages (yikes) at this time. I'll be back for that, though. As the person that initially made the statement that precipitated this thread, I ask for a little bit of leeway (and forgiveness if I address something that has been "done to death") as I try to explain my point. To begin with, although I realize that no system is infallible, and that people change (hence the built in failsafe to retract/remove the Good Guy Certification...btw, kudos to Webslave for the foresight); the bottom line is that up until recently, that icon meant exactly what it said...namely: this person is certified by FaunaClassifieds to be a Good Guy. Along with that, in fact the whole purpose of that, is the supposition that one could enter into a purchase with the holder of said icon comfortable and secure in the knowledge that he would not get screwed. That has been proven not to be the case, therefore, IMO, the icon has been tainted. That does not mean that the icon is meaningless, or that it should be abolished. It means that it has been tainted...that there is a blemish on the otherwise sparkling record. That cannot be denied. yes, the icon was removed - both by the offending parties request, and by popular vote. (Karen, I haven't had time to go back and get the exact phrasing, but there is something in there about the holder's business practices...the wording of which allows for people that have not directly done business with the person to voice their opinion. I felt the same way, so I went back and looked it up during all the hooplah. I'm sure this has been clarified by others, but that argument was one of the last things I read before starting this). Thanks to the BOI, this was brought into the open.
Please don't get me wrong - it is a great program...and if this is the only blemish that emerges, I'm sure that the impact of the "Good Guy Gone Bad" saga will be all but forgotten. In fact, I wonder how many of the people that are familiar with the Good Guy Certification are aware of all this. Yes, I stated that in my eyes, the icon was somewhat diminished in value. My opinion, not necessarily anyone else's...though I am not the only one that has expressed such a thing.
I have been doing this for a long time, and involved with reptile businesses and sales in varying capacities...but having MY OWN reptile business is new to me. Maybe I am something of a dreamer, but I really want to make it work. For that reason, perhaps I idealize some things a bit. How I want things to be, how I want to be seen, etc. This is the only offering I have for my feelings on this subject. Yes, I chopped the heck out of the end of this, because it served little purpose. some insights into the workings of my bizarre little mind, perhaps...but not necessarily anything the world is ready for, lol. One last piece - regarding my comments about not being sure if I would pursue the application, and if there was any purpose to it: I guess the simplest explanation is that I felt like there was no reason that I should wait to apply, whereas before I hadn't felt that I was deserving of it yet...not because I had done anything less than appropriate, but because I hadn't PROVEN that I was worthy. I knew I could apply for certification at anytime, per the rules...but didn't feel that I had the track record here to justify it. Now that I feel that I am as deserving of it as (just about) anybody else, why bother (sort of like "I wouldn't belong to any club that would have me as a member".) A simple change in perspective? perhaps.
sorry I rambled so long...jeez, wait til I have read the rest of it. Tell you what, I promise not to do this at 04:00 next time. And I'll try to remember the KISS principle

 

[Sasheena]

I guess if the impression of the GGC is that it is only offered to those who are dyed-in-the-wool, true-blue, Good Guys who will never be anything BUT good guys, then the recent actions would be awfully disappointing. No doubt on that!

The sad thing is that even if that was true, we've seen on here time and again that while many people can walk the walk and talk the talk of a good guy, if their heart/soul have any bad-guy leanings there could easily come the time when they will either get tired of being a good guy, or the temptation to do the bad guy thing will suddenly be too great.

I've seen dozens of threads where someone has come on here to say that "Big Name Breeder" is a "bad guy".... In ALL cases people have jumped to the defense of the "big name breeder" because that is the persona they know. In 1/4th or 1/3rd of those situations the trend in the thread changes from defense of the big-name-breeder, to shock and chagrin, to disgust that the person they defended, believed in, actually WAS a bad guy! Then the newly-marked "bad guy" gets a lot more vitriol and hate than your average bad guy.

OF course the rest of the time the person trying to "out" the big-name breeder is usually himself outted as a bad guy... no proof, hearsay, evidence of lies and ulterior motives.

SO....good guys go bad... sometimes. It's sad but true.

The GREAT thing about the GGC is that it is another way for this situation to be clarified. IF someone "outs" a bad guy on the BOI, it may never reflect on the trader rating... but it will be reflected on the GGC... but the GGC poll, if it remains permanent is still there for the bad guy to try to change people's minds by being flexible. The bad guy can show remorse and a new leaf... the bad guy thread might forever exist to show the details, but the poll is a flexible place to show the change in the tide of opinion.

So anyway, I don't think it has been damaged, but I never believed that that certification PROVED you were a good guy.

 

[hhmoore]

No, it didn't PROVE that anybody was a good guy. My point was more that the impression of many was that they could "buy with confidence", so to speak. I understand that as a group, those named in the GGC have made a commitment to quality animals, professional dealings, blah, blah, blah. I also fully understand that there is no requirement of experience, proven customer service, or anything else. I made myself familiar with the terms as soon as they were posted. As I said, in both my initial posting and the one in this thread, my response pertained to MY response...as it related to the way I viewed the "value" of the icon itself, its desirability for me, AND why I would strive to display it. I know what I bring to this (take your pick of descriptors) hobby, industry, market, profession; as do a good percentage of the people I have done business with regardless of whether I have been a buyer or seller. The fact that I didn't feel I had "proven" myself sufficiently to post the GGC icon, is purely due to my own standards and beliefs. I just found this site 8 months ago. Yes, during that time, I have attempted to make myself known. I ask questions and request clarifications as freely as I offer advice. But I have yet to offer anything for sale here (offered nothing online). As such, MY feeling is that despite the reputation that I have been attempting to build, and what little Trader response I have received, and the way I know I operate, I have no business displaying such an image. Again, this is what it means to me. One day, I (hope I) will feel that I have achieved my goals, that I have proven myself...to myself, my customers, and my peers. At that point, I will request GGC.

 

[hhmoore]

As I said before, I know my views on this are idealistic...but I like them that way, lol. I'm afraid that I do have to refrain from further posts on this thread until I can sift through the 50+ pages that I haven't gotten to. until then, regards.

 

[Sasheena]

Harald, thanks for sharing your views. I think one important thing to recognize is your own limitations on viewpoint... some things need to be changed, some things just plain need to be recognized and worked aroiund.... I admire your willingness to express your opinion and emphasize that it is YOUR opinion and not just plain jane the way things need to be done.

I think a lot of people have had to take a step back and think about the program a little bit more, decide what it REALLY means to them, what might have changed in their perceptions, and make decisions based on these things.

I know that I'm not a member of the program simply because I don't have a website. If all of my babies hatch out nicely and I find myself with 50 or 60 babies to sell in the next few months, I might just change the whole website thing, and I will get a GGC certificate at that time. For now, it's just something I plan on doing someday.

 

[WebSlave]

Well it looks like three issues have surfaced that may need to be addressed:

(1) Should the bar be raised for people applying for a certificate? If so, what criteria should be used to determine if someone is suitable to have one or not?

(2) Although obviously the certification program cannot prevent a previously good guy from going "bad", is there anything that the program SHOULD be doing that would help provide some incentive against that happening?

(3) When a participating member does go "bad", what exactly should be done about it? Is it in eveyone's best interests to simply delete the entire record of the participating member, or should it remain? What best serves the INTENT of the system?

The question coming to mind is whether or not it can remain a fairly simplistic system that would be easy enough to manage, or for it to be realistically effective, will it become too complicated and more trouble then it is worth doing?

 

[hhmoore]

whew!! got through it all

Well, I managed to get through everything...and I've got to say that almost 40 pages of it was little more than schoolyard bickering. In the later stages, though, a few good points were made - and a few that I will comment on.

The simple answer is that Bill should be ineligible for the program one year. If Bill wishes to re-apply at that point he should be able to. Then once again the community, via their votes when he re-applies, will decide if they believe he is worthy of the Good Guy Cert

(Shrap)
If you are referring to the votes on his standing GGC poll, I have no problem with that. If you are suggesting that there be some sort of vote taken (which is how it sounds)...I'm still mulling that over. On the face of things, it sounds reasonable - especially given the situation - but at the same time, it doesn't sit quite right. Luckily, it isn't my decision.

This program works already as is evidenced by those who have NOT asked to be given this certificate. Look at those who have voted negative on mine and ponder why THEY do not have such certificates. It's weeding out the scumbags already

(Wilomn)
Interesting point...and one that has actually led me to rethink my rationale for not requesting in. While my original statements on this matter still stand,
why would I risk the misinterpretation of NOT having such a seal displayed. This, too, will need a little thought

 

[shrap]

(Shrap)
If you are referring to the votes on his standing GGC poll, I have no problem with that. If you are suggesting that there be some sort of vote taken (which is how it sounds)...I'm still mulling that over. On the face of things, it sounds reasonable - especially given the situation - but at the same time, it doesn't sit quite right. Luckily, it isn't my decision.(

Hi hh,

Yes, I am referring to votes on his GGC.

 

[romad119]

In regards to the original point of this thread, I believe that anyone can vote yea or nay on someone without having to do business with them.

For example: you witness good or bad business. You don't have to be the customer at the time to be able to form an opinion or recognize how someone does business. If I'm treated like a saint but the guy before me get treated like disrespectfully etc, does that mean I have to consider them a good guy? NOT! I don't have to be harrassed, mugged, or other to know its not a good thing.

Though this doesn't mean that you should be rash in giving negative ratings etc. But also you shouldn't be rash to give positive. There are plenty of good sleuths on here who are quite skilled at delving into things and laying them out factually. Though often it takes a strainer to filter out the dribble.

Personality vs Business:

These forums show greatly personalities. If you are a seller, this can be a great advantage or disadvantage. Many repuatations have been made or ruined based on the personality regardless of the business ethnics the individual possesses. Should you bite your tongue on things? Sometimes yes, someemtimes no. Thats for you to decide. But a jerk employee of McDonalds is the same as a jerk herper. Both definitely won't increase business. At best you may break even. Some people are drawn to jerks.


Ummm, so yes you can give good/bad calls on a person regardless of having done business with them. I definitely can't see anyone going "Hey , I can't wait to do business with that SOB so I can finally say that he or she is a bad guy because of this and that."

But the vote should be an analytical choice, not a rash one.

Carpal tunnel here I come!