C
Chris@TSE
Guest
-ahem-
Ouch.....
Ouch.....
-
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....
Legendcham - Bad Guy!!!!
- Thread starter Lizard Lair
- Start date
Chameleon Company
New member
....since Lane has been shown to be a crook
Shelley,
You are right in that a settlement that had you relying on the continued honesty of Lane (what an oxymoron that is) would seem a bit absurd. Again, this would be obvious to the court, and you would likely just be seeking a cash settlement anyway. To be honest, Lane is not going to hatch 200 Mitsio - Marfana eggs, and they aren't going to command $350 each .... can't happen. But there is cause for reasonable return, and she is guilty.
If she does not settle this matter soon, I see it also as highly likely that the names of her prior cohorts are going to be dragged in also. As you can imagine, there are many in the community who find it laughable that the editor of an on-line magazine, and an author for that same publication, and another respected breeder, joined Lane in a joint BOI thread (as co-posters!) to attack the "business ethics" of others back in September, yours truly included. While I think they were a bit quick on the trigger then, I can understand their concerns. That it was fodder for the BOI was highly suspect, but they chose it as their venue none-the-less. John Lucas, of Cham-Paradise, works hard to prodiuce fine animals. He then goes and soils himself with Lane, and comes off as a collossal hypocrite (see Ivan's post). The E-Zine editor spends an inordinate amount of effort going after the business ethics of others, is a bit weak in his retractions, and yet co-authored a lengthly post with Lane, who seems to have no business ethics. Lane's treatment of Shelley in this deal stinks as bad as any ethics issue in the BOI has all year, and the scuttlebutt is that the E-Zine editor actually drafted the original post back in September, co-signed it with Lane and John Lucas and another entity, made John appear to be the original author, and let it rip. Guilty by association ???? I'd have to say no, cause Lane seems to have ripped off Shelley all by herself. Hypocritical? Yes! I am also very tempted to start a new thread, and let the horses loose.
The real shame here, and there is plenty to go around, is that John puts a lot of work into his business. And the E-Zine is also a labor of love, and is an asset to the hobby. And other breeders who were involved also work very hard. The thread in September was a continued manifestation of stupid feuding, and I make no excuses for any of the parties involved (see the long one in the Chameleon Photo Gallery). All involved know that I don't care for it ... all! And now Lane pulls a stunt like this, and pulls them all down. And because they all took such a "heroic" stand on ethics before, with Lane at their side, she makes them all look as fools now. Lane reneges on her part of a breeding deal, and keeps Shelley's $5100 investment. John Lucas defends it, and then claims copyright infringement too. What a joke, as so clearly outlined by Ivan!
So, with all the hard work put into the E-Zine, and thier businesses, I look at all these self-annointed titles after their name, I can only hope that I catch the next blue-light special at K-Mart, and maybe pick up some titles too. Do I get a decoder ring with that?
Thank you Lane!
Jim Flaherty
Had a chameleon once, etc, etc . com
Shelley,
You are right in that a settlement that had you relying on the continued honesty of Lane (what an oxymoron that is) would seem a bit absurd. Again, this would be obvious to the court, and you would likely just be seeking a cash settlement anyway. To be honest, Lane is not going to hatch 200 Mitsio - Marfana eggs, and they aren't going to command $350 each .... can't happen. But there is cause for reasonable return, and she is guilty.
If she does not settle this matter soon, I see it also as highly likely that the names of her prior cohorts are going to be dragged in also. As you can imagine, there are many in the community who find it laughable that the editor of an on-line magazine, and an author for that same publication, and another respected breeder, joined Lane in a joint BOI thread (as co-posters!) to attack the "business ethics" of others back in September, yours truly included. While I think they were a bit quick on the trigger then, I can understand their concerns. That it was fodder for the BOI was highly suspect, but they chose it as their venue none-the-less. John Lucas, of Cham-Paradise, works hard to prodiuce fine animals. He then goes and soils himself with Lane, and comes off as a collossal hypocrite (see Ivan's post). The E-Zine editor spends an inordinate amount of effort going after the business ethics of others, is a bit weak in his retractions, and yet co-authored a lengthly post with Lane, who seems to have no business ethics. Lane's treatment of Shelley in this deal stinks as bad as any ethics issue in the BOI has all year, and the scuttlebutt is that the E-Zine editor actually drafted the original post back in September, co-signed it with Lane and John Lucas and another entity, made John appear to be the original author, and let it rip. Guilty by association ???? I'd have to say no, cause Lane seems to have ripped off Shelley all by herself. Hypocritical? Yes! I am also very tempted to start a new thread, and let the horses loose.
The real shame here, and there is plenty to go around, is that John puts a lot of work into his business. And the E-Zine is also a labor of love, and is an asset to the hobby. And other breeders who were involved also work very hard. The thread in September was a continued manifestation of stupid feuding, and I make no excuses for any of the parties involved (see the long one in the Chameleon Photo Gallery). All involved know that I don't care for it ... all! And now Lane pulls a stunt like this, and pulls them all down. And because they all took such a "heroic" stand on ethics before, with Lane at their side, she makes them all look as fools now. Lane reneges on her part of a breeding deal, and keeps Shelley's $5100 investment. John Lucas defends it, and then claims copyright infringement too. What a joke, as so clearly outlined by Ivan!
So, with all the hard work put into the E-Zine, and thier businesses, I look at all these self-annointed titles after their name, I can only hope that I catch the next blue-light special at K-Mart, and maybe pick up some titles too. Do I get a decoder ring with that?
Thank you Lane!
Jim Flaherty
Had a chameleon once, etc, etc . com
I don’t pretend to know anything at all about Chameleons other than recently I’ve been giving serious thought to purchasing one…which is what lead me to this thread in the first place. I can’t begin to understand all the who fathered who, who is pure, who is the most exceptional example of a particular subspecies etc. My hobby has been Boas and Corns.
That being said I think what is being done to Shelley is a shame. All of the issues I don’t understand aside it seems to me that even Lane admits to have entered into a deal that offspring from these animals were to be split. Either a 50/50 or a 72/25 depending on which version of the story you choose to believe. Now Shelley is being offered 1% to 2% and it seems only after she pays Lane a large sum of money. Also this percentage might be for eggs only no offspring. The rationale behind this is that Shelley has somehow tarnished Lane’s reputation.
If Lane really believes that Shelley acted with the intention of ruining her reputation then perhaps she is right in cutting off their relationship…but only AFTER honoring her original deal. Getting mad at someone is no excuse for attempting to swindle them out of property/animals. I understand that Lane incurred some bills caring for the Adults…again I have no idea what it costs to keep Chameleons and I don’t really care to know…but if these costs were going to factor into the original agreement then stipulations should have been made before Lane accepted the animals. Lane, if you truly in your heart feel that your friend has betrayed you I can sympathize, being hurt by someone you thought was your friend is always painful but you shouldn’t use your hurt to justify keeping money and/or property that you have previously promised to another, especially if you’re that concerned with your reputation. It has to make people think…she is an honorable person until you do something to make her mad! And since so much of the reptile trade takes place between strangers how is a stranger supposed to know just when you’ll decide to get mad at them??
Well that’s my 2 cents anyway. Sorry if posting this is stirring up an already boiling cauldron but my guilt over not posting in Shelley’s behalf was getting the best of me. Now back to happily lurking.
Meryl Lechner
That being said I think what is being done to Shelley is a shame. All of the issues I don’t understand aside it seems to me that even Lane admits to have entered into a deal that offspring from these animals were to be split. Either a 50/50 or a 72/25 depending on which version of the story you choose to believe. Now Shelley is being offered 1% to 2% and it seems only after she pays Lane a large sum of money. Also this percentage might be for eggs only no offspring. The rationale behind this is that Shelley has somehow tarnished Lane’s reputation.
If Lane really believes that Shelley acted with the intention of ruining her reputation then perhaps she is right in cutting off their relationship…but only AFTER honoring her original deal. Getting mad at someone is no excuse for attempting to swindle them out of property/animals. I understand that Lane incurred some bills caring for the Adults…again I have no idea what it costs to keep Chameleons and I don’t really care to know…but if these costs were going to factor into the original agreement then stipulations should have been made before Lane accepted the animals. Lane, if you truly in your heart feel that your friend has betrayed you I can sympathize, being hurt by someone you thought was your friend is always painful but you shouldn’t use your hurt to justify keeping money and/or property that you have previously promised to another, especially if you’re that concerned with your reputation. It has to make people think…she is an honorable person until you do something to make her mad! And since so much of the reptile trade takes place between strangers how is a stranger supposed to know just when you’ll decide to get mad at them??
Well that’s my 2 cents anyway. Sorry if posting this is stirring up an already boiling cauldron but my guilt over not posting in Shelley’s behalf was getting the best of me. Now back to happily lurking.
Meryl Lechner
Ya know, every time lane gets caught in a lie she threatens to sue...I'd love to be her attorny...I could retire off lane alone LOL! I would also love to see someone take her to court, I bet she'd poo her pants!
Personally I would not let that much money stay in the hands of someone like that, I'm sure they have those "we dont get paid unless you do" lawyers there also if you dont want to fork over the up front costs. Make her take pictures of the eggs...shoot...take a road trip and get your half of the eggs...I'm sure if you won you could have a police escort you to get your eggs...do something.
I also must applaud Shelly 10 times over for not giving a perfectly healthy animal to someone to kill because it exposes a dirty little secrete. (by the way lane...is TS' DNA what your going to use to compair one eye offspring? LOL)
Personally I would not let that much money stay in the hands of someone like that, I'm sure they have those "we dont get paid unless you do" lawyers there also if you dont want to fork over the up front costs. Make her take pictures of the eggs...shoot...take a road trip and get your half of the eggs...I'm sure if you won you could have a police escort you to get your eggs...do something.
I also must applaud Shelly 10 times over for not giving a perfectly healthy animal to someone to kill because it exposes a dirty little secrete. (by the way lane...is TS' DNA what your going to use to compair one eye offspring? LOL)
Lizard Lair
New member
Hmmmmmmm
Hey Jovana - that's food for thought!!
Shelly Dougherty
Hey Jovana - that's food for thought!!
Shelly Dougherty