Katie Richardson, Extraordinary Reptiles BEWARE

[cthulhu77]

Chris, I really thought that you might get it...obviously, your brain isn't as sharp as you think it is (wow, a catch22)...
Amazing how you repeat your mistakes over, and over, and over and over...all the while yelling about how "we don't get it".
Chris...we got it...you are an idiot.

greg

 

[cthulhu77]

Bruce

I don't know him from adam...(eeeww. bad analogy now) but, the point is : he can't seem to grasp that apologizing and then saying "but I didn't really do anything wrong, you all just can't understand me" is ridiculous...
Ah hell...this whole thing is off topic now...let's all just agree to drop any more references to rape as being anything but what it actually is.

greg

 

[Jim O]

Okay. One last time...

If the problem lies in the fact that merely mentioning the word was offensive no matter what the context, then I do sincerely apologize. I understand this now...and I was wrong.

If the problem lies in the fact that some people misunderstood and thought I was actually blaming my daughter, then my INTEGRITY does not allow me to take blame for someone else's lack of understanding.

Farewell,
Chris

 

[Jim O]

I think CJ is a nice guy! No sense in killing him for a comment.

I hear right-wing radio talk show/TV hosts get away with alot worse all the time.

Bruce,

You are right. But we're not "killing him" for a comment, but instead for standing by what he said and insisting he is right and the rest of us are too stupid to understand.

He made a mistake. It was pointed out to him politely. He could have and he should have issued a mea culpa and been done with it. Instead he has insisted that he meant the opposite of what he said and that we are all too stupid to see it. Another Rhodes Scholar.

 

[CJBianco]

Instead he has insisted that he meant the opposite of what he said and that we are all too stupid to see it.

Jim,

I really do not think that many people are actually READING what I'm writing. Maybe they only see the word "rape" and feel the need to fight against it. Who knows? Regardless, .I have stated COUNTLESS times that no matter what the crime...it is NEVER them victim's fault.

Still, people try to argue against me while always stating "it is NEVER the victim's fault."

Aren't we saying the same thing? I really do not understand the conflict. Please explain to me where our points of view differ.

Chris

 

[Lucille]

However, since explaining the simplicity of this to some people seems quite impossible, I will graciously excuse myself from this discussion.

Chris

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Okay. One last time...

If the problem lies in the fact that merely mentioning the word was offensive no matter what the context, then I do sincerely apologize. I understand this now...and I was wrong.

If the problem lies in the fact that some people misunderstood and thought I was actually blaming my daughter, then my INTEGRITY does not allow me to take blame for someone else's lack of understanding.

Farewell,
Chris

*********************************
Chris, you are now further impeaching anything you may be saying by the multiple games of "I will say one last thing and say goodbye" games you are playing. If you want to participate, fine. But playing word games is simply **not appropriate** for a discussion of a crime as grave and serious as rape is.

 

[CJBianco]

Chris, you are now further impeaching anything you may be saying by the multiple games of "I will say one last thing and say goodbye" games you are playing. If you want to participate, fine. But playing word games is simply **not appropriate** for a discussion of a crime as grave and serious as rape is.

Oh my God! Are you serious? This is so sad. At first I honestly believed that the reason for all of this controversy was the fact that few people understood the intent of my original statement. Now I see that some people here just want to pick a good fight. Some people will attack ANYTHING...regardless of reason. That is so sad. It really is.

No wonder many good people avoid these forums.

My Final Post,
Chris

 

[Jim O]

Jim,

Please explain to me where our points of view differ.

Chris

OK, I will try. *Sighs*

First you said:

You are totally correct. It is Tosha's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the sale anyway. She was ripped off. It is Tosha's fault.

Just as if I were to warn my daughter that the new boy on the block is bad news. Stay away from him. My daughter likes the boy. She thinks he's cute. She puts on make-up and a pretty dress and leaves to meet him at a party. He drugs and rapes her. It is totally my daughter's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the date. She was raped. It is my daughter's fault.

Chris

Now you say:

Jim,

I really do not think that many people are actually READING what I'm writing. Maybe they only see the word "rape" and feel the need to fight against it. Who knows? Regardless, .I have stated COUNTLESS times that no matter what the crime...it is NEVER them victim's fault.

Still, people try to argue against me while always stating "it is NEVER the victim's fault."

Aren't we saying the same thing?

I'd say that you made both ends of that argument. It's there in your words.

Now I do agree we are saying the same thing, except in your original post where you said the direct opposite.

You agreed that I was "totally correct" and that it was Tosha's own fault. You said those exact words. And then you likened it to a your daughter being raped after exercising poor judgement. And you said "It is my daughter's fault".

We all agree that rape is NEVER the victim's fault. But that is NOT what you said initially. And you keep saying things like "I really do not think that many people are actually READING what I'm writing".

Well I read it. I explained it to you. Now I suggest that you read the words that you wrote.

Sheeesh!!

 

[Ken Harbart]

Just an observation folks...

It's hard to convey subtle tone on the internet. What I believe Chris was trying to convey with the rape example was sarcasm, and was not actually asserting that it would be the victim's fault.

 

[cahrens]

:deer:

There should really be a smily in here shown beating a DEAD HORSE. I think it would get used a lot. This is the closest I could come up with. Just because something is said or is put in writing doesn't mean that the person meant exactly that. Every Monday I go to work and people ask me how I'm doing. I tell them that I'm terrific. Overjoyed to be there. This is not the case. I'm saying the EXACT OPPOSITE of how I really feel. Using sarcasm to answer the question. The "daughter rape story" was an obvious sarcastic comparison. Quoting what was said doesn't always get the true meaning. You can't take bits and pieces out of the context that they were meant. Especially when someone is called out on their words and apologizes explaining that they didn't mean it literally. Anyway that's my take on the whole thing. -Chris Ahrens

 

[DAND]

No wonder many good people avoid these forums.

There is no reason for good people to avoid these forums. Now, the bad people and the not too bright people should think twice.

 

[Wilomn]

chris, you're an IDIOT.

If you do business with a KNOWN liar and suspected scammer and THEN you get taken advantage of it is YOUR fault, you, the victim, asked for it.

DUMBASS.

bruce, if you're supporting this idiot you're not too sharp yourself.

Calling him an idiot is a compliment.

A half-assed appology is worthless. This guy simply can't have a buttcheek left to sit on, which accounts for the fact that he is obviously sitting on his brain, squishing BOTH brain cells into non-functioning pancakes.

chris, you're STILL an idiot. You might want to get that tattooed on your forehead, the place your brain should reside behind, so you don't forget again and make the mistake of thinking you're either smart or funny, as you are neither.

 

[reptilebreeder]

Originally Posted by CJBianco
You are totally correct. It is Tosha's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the sale anyway. She was ripped off. It is Tosha's fault.
Just as if I were to warn my daughter that the new boy on the block is bad news. Stay away from him. My daughter likes the boy. She thinks he's cute. She puts on make-up and a pretty dress and leaves to meet him at a party. He drugs and rapes her. It is totally my daughter's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the date. She was raped. It is my daughter's fault.
Chris

The analogy may have been a little rough, but I don't think he changed his statement from saying it was their fault to not saying it was their fault. My interpretation when I first read it was that he was saying that every one was blaming Tosha, and that it was her fault, so to "defend" her, he wrote a statement representing the collective ie.

You are totally correct. It is Tosha's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the sale anyway. She was ripped off.

He had already stated that he didn't think she was at fault, and felt that everyone was being too rough on her, so after he made what he felt was the collective statement (of the "attackers"), he ended it with It is Tosha's fault in bold to emphasize, what he thought was the exaggerated opinion of the "Tosha attackers" almost in a facetious way. He then used an analogy that should have been obvious, that even though he was saying it was his daughter's fault, with the same bold ending statement, to emphasize the facetiousness, he actually meant that no one in their right mind (including himself) would blame the daughter, ergo they should not be blaming Tosha.

So those that have voiced their opinion that the rape analogy may have been in poor taste, is a warranted opinion, but I think that those who are saying he really meant that his daughter was at fault, that he flip flopped, or changed what he meant, I don't think are correct. His meaning was that they were both wrong. This thread was started because there is once again another thief in our midsts, and I think the derailing of this thread by going too far(In my opinion only), in the attacks on both Tosha and Chris has done a service to the real scamming thief and a disservice to what the BOI should be all about.

Sure Tosha was taking advantage of a situation, so it "served her right" that the gamble she took on the hets. burned her, but she still paid for and should have got feeding females. If I remember correctly, when she bought those it was right after Katie responded to this thread, and after reading the thread, I initially came away feeling like she made a pretty decent explanation, and felt like maybe she was the one who got swindled by the other guy. So when Tosha made the deal, I think it was at a point where "benefit of doubt" could have still applied, so I think the attack was/is a little strong on Tosha. Same for Chris, use of analogy topic may have been offensive, but his meaning of the statements and the analogy in reverse sarcasim, in and of itself was correct (in that he felt neither -Tosha, nor daughter- should be blamed.)
Well, that is my intepretation and opinion, so I said it. So be it. There is no flame suit emoticon, so I'll just brave any onslaught in my skivies (hey it's Sunday morning.)

 

[Bill_Leverton]

Ok, We are all in agreement Chris made A "DUMB" comment But This thread should get back on course with Katie and her Magical Snakes ...Watcha think boys and girls???????

 

[Lucille]

Excellent idea, just like usual, Bill.

 

[Orchid Gecko]

Its about time

Can we play again?

Remember us the victims? Of course some wise a** will say I am stupid, ok now what do you want to talk about.

That all said; I invite all victims of Katie dearest and Harrison to forward to me copies of all deals and explanations as to what did or did not transpire.
I will consolidate the responses and post them here, if the victim allows.

This will be the start of at least my quest to prosicute and/or to try and recoup monies for all of us

Tosha, come back and play, I think everyone is through beating each other up, lets get them who ever them is.

Steve
Orchid Gecho
[email protected]

 

[pch101]

"The analogy may have been a little rough, but I don't think he changed his statement from saying it was their fault to not saying it was their fault. My interpretation when I first read it was that he was saying that every one was blaming Tosha, and that it was her fault, so to "defend" her, he wrote a statement representing the collective ie.

He had already stated that he didn't think she was at fault, and felt that everyone was being too rough on her, so after he made what he felt was the collective statement (of the "attackers"), he ended it with It is Tosha's fault in bold to emphasize, what he thought was the exaggerated opinion of the "Tosha attackers" almost in a facetious way. He then used an analogy that should have been obvious, that even though he was saying it was his daughter's fault, with the same bold ending statement, to emphasize the facetiousness, he actually meant that no one in their right mind (including himself) would blame the daughter, ergo they should not be blaming Tosha.

So those that have voiced their opinion that the rape analogy may have been in poor taste, is a warranted opinion, but I think that those who are saying he really meant that his daughter was at fault, that he flip flopped, or changed what he meant, I don't think are correct. His meaning was that they were both wrong. This thread was started because there is once again another thief in our midsts, and I think the derailing of this thread by going too far(In my opinion only), in the attacks on both Tosha and Chris has done a service to the real scamming thief and a disservice to what the BOI should be all about.

Sure Tosha was taking advantage of a situation, so it "served her right" that the gamble she took on the hets. burned her, but she still paid for and should have got feeding females. If I remember correctly, when she bought those it was right after Katie responded to this thread, and after reading the thread, I initially came away feeling like she made a pretty decent explanation, and felt like maybe she was the one who got swindled by the other guy. So when Tosha made the deal, I think it was at a point where "benefit of doubt" could have still applied, so I think the attack was/is a little strong on Tosha. Same for Chris, use of analogy topic may have been offensive, but his meaning of the statements and the analogy in reverse sarcasim, in and of itself was correct (in that he felt neither -Tosha, nor daughter- should be blamed.)
Well, that is my intepretation and opinion, so I said it. So be it. There is no flame suit emoticon, so I'll just brave any onslaught in my skivies (hey it's Sunday morning.)"

John, I will agree with that. Maybe we/I were hard on him. On the other hand, I still stand by the fact that some things should be left to the verbal word, as it can be pretty tricky to read into a sarcastic remark (especially when the sarcasm was involved through the entire remark. I think it was a bad choice on his part, but I also think we (his critics) should have read his previous posts a little better. I think Chris has learned his lesson for the day, and so have I.

 

[Jim O]

The analogy may have been a little rough, but I don't think he changed his statement from saying it was their fault to not saying it was their fault. My interpretation when I first read it was that he was saying that every one was blaming Tosha, and that it was her fault, so to "defend" her, he wrote a statement representing the collective ie. He had already stated that he didn't think she was at fault, and felt that everyone was being too rough on her, so after he made what he felt was the collective statement (of the "attackers"), he ended it with It is Tosha's fault in bold to emphasize, what he thought was the exaggerated opinion of the "Tosha attackers" almost in a facetious way. He then used an analogy that should have been obvious, that even though he was saying it was his daughter's fault, with the same bold ending statement, to emphasize the facetiousness, he actually meant that no one in their right mind (including himself) would blame the daughter, ergo they should not be blaming Tosha.

So those that have voiced their opinion that the rape analogy may have been in poor taste, is a warranted opinion, but I think that those who are saying he really meant that his daughter was at fault, that he flip flopped, or changed what he meant, I don't think are correct. His meaning was that they were both wrong. This thread was started because there is once again another thief in our midsts, and I think the derailing of this thread by going too far(In my opinion only), in the attacks on both Tosha and Chris has done a service to the real scamming thief and a disservice to what the BOI should be all about.

Sure Tosha was taking advantage of a situation, so it "served her right" that the gamble she took on the hets. burned her, but she still paid for and should have got feeding females. If I remember correctly, when she bought those it was right after Katie responded to this thread, and after reading the thread, I initially came away feeling like she made a pretty decent explanation, and felt like maybe she was the one who got swindled by the other guy. So when Tosha made the deal, I think it was at a point where "benefit of doubt" could have still applied, so I think the attack was/is a little strong on Tosha. Same for Chris, use of analogy topic may have been offensive, but his meaning of the statements and the analogy in reverse sarcasim, in and of itself was correct (in that he felt neither -Tosha, nor daughter- should be blamed.)
Well, that is my intepretation and opinion, so I said it. So be it. There is no flame suit emoticon, so I'll just brave any onslaught in my skivies (hey it's Sunday morning.)

John,

I respect your opinion, but....you premise a large part of your argument on his alleged formatting and that he emboldened part of it. He didn't do that. I added it for emphasis. Here is the entire post without any formatting change lest anyone take this out of context, I will show my preceeding post and the one in-between to show the context of what he was agreeing with.

Post #67:

Thank you Dennis and Lucille.

I agree that being ripped off for $10 is every bit as much a "bad" thing as being ripped off for $3500 or for $900 (as I was by a since outed--by me-- BOI Bad Guy). There is no dollar limit on that.

But let's be reasonable, please. And fair. I'm sorry that Tosha feels ripped off and I'm sorry Tosha didn't get what Tosha thought that Tosha should have gotten. But wait, Tosha got what she expected, and exactly what she deserved. After all, in Tosha's own words:

Yes I knew what I was getting into I actually baited Katie into it expecting the worst.

Tosha baited Katie and was expecting the worst. Tosha got what Tosha expected after BAITING a bad guy. In essence Tosha begged Katie to rip Tosha off and Tosha got exactly that.

Tosha's complaints remind me of a little story from 1837 by Hans Christian Andersen called The Emperor's New Clothes:

It is the story of the Ruler of a distant land who was so enamored of his appearance and his clothing that he had a different suit for every hour of the day.

One day two rogues arrived in town, claiming to be gifted weavers. They convinced the Emperor that they could weave the most wonderful cloth, which had a magical property. The clothes were only visible to those who were completely pure in heart and spirit.

The Emperor was impressed and ordered the weavers to begin work immediately. The rogues, who had a deep understanding of human nature, began to feign work on empty looms.

Minister after minister went to view the new clothes and all came back exhorting the beauty of the cloth on the looms even though none of them could see a thing.

Finally a grand procession was planned for the Emperor to display his new finery. The Emperor went to view his clothes and was shocked to see absolutely nothing, but he pretended to admire the fabulous cloth, inspect the clothes with awe, and, after disrobing, go through the motions of carefully putting on a suit of the new garments.

Under a royal canopy the Emperor appeared to the admiring throng of his people - - all of whom cheered and clapped because they all knew the rogue weavers' tale and did not want to be seen as less than pure of heart.

But, the bubble burst when an innocent child loudly exclaimed, for the whole kingdom to hear, that the Emperor had nothing on at all. He had no clothes.

Maybe I'm the "innocent child" in that story, but the facts speak for themselves. Sorry Tosha, but the Emperor has no clothes.

Post #68 was from Dennis Hultman:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim O
Thank you Dennis and Lucille

But let's be reasonable, please. And fair. I'm sorry that Tosha feels ripped off and I'm sorry Tosha didn't get what Tosha thought that Tosha should have gotten. But wait, Tosha got what she expected, and exactly what she deserved. After all, in Tosha's own words:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Hultman
I of course would not have spent a dime with this low life but it was Tosha’s choice for whatever reason.
It is also ok for us to point out that it was stupid.


Sorry, Cahrens about your situation. Seems we are finding more and more people that have been scammed. I do believe that there is another person that has posted a bad guy thread about Harrison on Reptile Bid that has not posted here.
__________________
Dennis Hultman

Now here is Post #69:

You are totally correct. It is Tosha's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the sale anyway. She was ripped off. It is Tosha's fault.

Just as if I were to warn my daughter that the new boy on the block is bad news. Stay away from him. My daughter likes the boy. She thinks he's cute. She puts on make-up and a pretty dress and leaves to meet him at a party. He drugs and rapes her. It is totally my daughter's fault. She knew of the danger. She was warned. She asked for the date. She was raped. It is my daughter's fault.

Now let us please get back to the point of this thread:

The fact that both the paperwork from Bearded Pets and Richard Harrison use the same obscure font...both list entire clutches...both are interestingly similar.

Chris

Chris was agreeing with me or arguably with Dennis. And he said "It is Tosha's fault". He said it twice. No quotes, italics, bolds, or anything to even remotely suggest that it was sarcasm.

He then went on to directly liken it to his daughter being raped. He said "It is my daughter's fault". Again, no quotes, italics, bolds, or other formatting. No smiley. No "J/K"

Where does he say that he was being sarcastic about Tosha? Nowhere that I can see it. And he makes the direct analogy "Just as if I were to warn my daughter..." in starting the rape scenario. "Just as if".

So in essence he was agreeing with me and/or with Dennis that it was Tosha's fault. And then he was directly likening it to a rape. There was no "mistake" and no hint of sarcasm. He screwed up. That isn't the problem though. It's that he keeps on insisting that he meant the opposite and all we need to do is read his words. I have read his words and I don't see that in any way shape or form in his post. Put in a smiley or a "J/K" or something if you are "kidding". But he wasn't. Not the way he wrote it. All he needed to do was issue an unqualified retraction/apology and this would have ended 30 posts ago. No "However" or "but". Just a plain retraction, as Lucille suggested. But he continues to insist that his words don't say what they so clearly do.

Now I am done making that point. I don't mind if I'm the last unconvinced man standing, though I doubt that I am.

 

[Orchid Gecko]

Come on guys give it up. Like two flys crashing against a window try to get out. Call Dr Laura on this topic and lets get back to it!!!

 

[Chris@TSE]