Kenny, for what little it may be worth, this made me aware of you in the first place and -in my eyes- it certainly casts you in a positive light.
-
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....
Bad Guy Naturalist Guy, Kenneth Barnett
- Thread starter Joseal
- Start date
Skinker
Member
Same from me, never heard of Kenneth Barnett before I saw this thread. I seldom read good guy posts to be honest - hardly surprised what I find there when I do. I often read the bad guy posts because that's where I really learn about folks. Worry not about the mark next to your name on the thread title. People aren't going to judge you by the title of the thread but rather on how you conduct yourself in responding. If anything, misrepresenting a person's character by painting them an unwarranted bad guy makes the original poster look the fool. As for those who can't read and tell the difference, do you really care what they think? I certainly wouldn't be interested in sending people who can't read a few pages to find out the truth an animal that could grow into a large, potentially dangerous adult..
Mr. Barnett. I read your posts, but honestly did more skimming than actually reading in depth. I would like to respond to things point by point, but quite honestly that would take more time than I care to put into that endeavor. So instead let me ask you a few questions to try to solidify in my mind what exactly your complaint is about. And then make some comments about my position in what is a rather common situation here. That is, that someone thinks that their situation is completely and absolutely unique and therefore worthy of some sort of special consideration, regardless of long standing, tried and true policies.
First off, what exactly was Ms. DeRacho's complaint that she detailed in her opening statement(s) in this thread? WHY did she bother to post here? What was the catalyst that gave her incentive enough to want to make public statements about another person? Did you in any way contribute to her coming to a decision to make a public statement?
When those are answered, have you done any research in the Board Of Inquiry forum to determine that this exhibits an instance that is completely unique and unusual in regards to you and Ms. DeRacho? Have there EVER been others selling wild caught animals here? Has anyone else ever posted a thread in the Board Of Inquiry about them? Has anyone EVER posted a negative post primarily about someone else's private correspondence or attitude towards them?
Secondly, what exactly IS the policy of the Board Of Inquiry that you feel that this thread does not comply with? Maybe there is something about how this forum was set up by me, that is more apparent to you than it is to me. So what have I overlooked that seems glaringly obvious to you?
Thirdly, are you aware that the red "X" was decided upon by Ms. DeRacho and she alone made that symbol appear in the topic line of this thread? For your enlightenment, if needed, no one else had any control over that. So for you to say that the board is at fault for that symbol appearing in relation to YOU, is in my opinion, not sustained by any facts whatsoever. The point of this is that no one on the staff here made any decision whatsoever concerning what symbol would be displayed on this thread. This was NOT a programming decision or management determination, it was a CHOICE made by the person creating the thread.
Fourthly, you made the following statement:
Well, excuse me, but did you or did you not state that you are SELLING those animals that you catch locally? If you did, then how can you claim that the exchange of money for merchandise is NOT a business practice? Certainly we can call it a "practice", can we not, because from what I have read the implication is that you have done this sort of "business transaction" more than once, have you not? Did you or did you not state or imply that the main reason you are HERE on FaunaClassifieds is so you can advertise your animals "for sale"? What would YOU call selling animals online?
It appears that Ms. DeRacho is disturbed over your BUSINESS PRACTICE in regard to those wild caught animals, and from what I gather from her initial post, she did not much appreciate how you responded to her in correspondence. So the question appears to be centered on the fact that you do not believe that Ms. DeRacho had a valid REASON to post a complaint about you. You believe she doesn't. Obviously SHE does. And so she did post such a complaint. Is it a VALID complaint? Beats me. I have never taken on that job to have to make such a determination. The Board of Inquiry was never set up and run with that sort of thing in mind.
Which, of course, brings us to a point that I have had to state more times than I can shake a stick at concerning this forum and my position on it. Which is, I do not, have not, can not, and will not, act as a judge in matters between parties that are brought into the public eye in this forum. The reason, quite simply, is because everything posted is basically hearsay unless I have first hand experience and knowledge of the parties, the statements made, and any evidence about such statements and related practices. The ONLY time I act in the capacity of a judge is in matters related to the RULES of this site and the enforcement of them. Pretty much any registered member can post whatever they like as long as it is within the rules. Which means OPINIONS, as well as stated and/or perceived facts. Everyone reading such posts is free to make their own decision about what it is, or who, they are reading about.
What IS apparently being questioned here is the exercise of someone posting their OPINION in this public forum. And now I am apparently being demanded to be a JUDGE to make a determination of whether or not someone does, in fact, HAVE a right to their opinion remaining being posted here. Or, perhaps, whether I, and site staff acting under my direction, have a RIGHT to allow such postings to remain, regardless of what someone else wishes to take place concerning someone else's words. Which, quite frankly, would fly directly in the face of a long standing and uniformly applied policy of this site, and actually the basis for the Board Of Inquiry's popularity and credibility in this industry. Quite frankly, to even consider making exceptions to that policy would be quite damaging to the welfare and sustainability of this site because of the ensuing lack of credibility that would result. If one thread was deleted, were there others? And WHY were they removed?
As for your apparent claims concerning this thread, was there actually any libel involved? Was anything that was stated that is libelous actually going to be PROVABLY damaging to you? If you are not engaging in a business, what damages are you claiming to be at risk of? If there are damages being sustained, well, as has been implied, then your path is clear, Mr. Barnett. That is something you need to take up in the court room between YOURSELF and the person who made such damaging statements. No one else made such statements, and certainly no one else had any sort of guiding hand influencing what either party has stated. Posts are not pre-approved before being published, so they were not subjected to any sort of litmus test or peer review to determine whether or not they satisfied any sort of qualification to be posted in public. I believe you will find there is substantial case law protecting public message boards such as this from liability for third party posts made in this manner.
Anyway, sorry, posted more than I had intended, but I am sorry that you feel that you and this situation are unique. You are not. It is not. You are not the first person seemingly claiming that something was posted by another party about them that is contrary to the law. If you can prove such a claim in a court of law against the author of such statements, and a court order is issued to force me to remove damaging statements you claim were made against or about you, well, you will have to bring us to that bridge before we can even think about crossing it.
First off, what exactly was Ms. DeRacho's complaint that she detailed in her opening statement(s) in this thread? WHY did she bother to post here? What was the catalyst that gave her incentive enough to want to make public statements about another person? Did you in any way contribute to her coming to a decision to make a public statement?
When those are answered, have you done any research in the Board Of Inquiry forum to determine that this exhibits an instance that is completely unique and unusual in regards to you and Ms. DeRacho? Have there EVER been others selling wild caught animals here? Has anyone else ever posted a thread in the Board Of Inquiry about them? Has anyone EVER posted a negative post primarily about someone else's private correspondence or attitude towards them?
Secondly, what exactly IS the policy of the Board Of Inquiry that you feel that this thread does not comply with? Maybe there is something about how this forum was set up by me, that is more apparent to you than it is to me. So what have I overlooked that seems glaringly obvious to you?
Thirdly, are you aware that the red "X" was decided upon by Ms. DeRacho and she alone made that symbol appear in the topic line of this thread? For your enlightenment, if needed, no one else had any control over that. So for you to say that the board is at fault for that symbol appearing in relation to YOU, is in my opinion, not sustained by any facts whatsoever. The point of this is that no one on the staff here made any decision whatsoever concerning what symbol would be displayed on this thread. This was NOT a programming decision or management determination, it was a CHOICE made by the person creating the thread.
Fourthly, you made the following statement:
Well, excuse me, but did you or did you not state that you are SELLING those animals that you catch locally? If you did, then how can you claim that the exchange of money for merchandise is NOT a business practice? Certainly we can call it a "practice", can we not, because from what I have read the implication is that you have done this sort of "business transaction" more than once, have you not? Did you or did you not state or imply that the main reason you are HERE on FaunaClassifieds is so you can advertise your animals "for sale"? What would YOU call selling animals online?
It appears that Ms. DeRacho is disturbed over your BUSINESS PRACTICE in regard to those wild caught animals, and from what I gather from her initial post, she did not much appreciate how you responded to her in correspondence. So the question appears to be centered on the fact that you do not believe that Ms. DeRacho had a valid REASON to post a complaint about you. You believe she doesn't. Obviously SHE does. And so she did post such a complaint. Is it a VALID complaint? Beats me. I have never taken on that job to have to make such a determination. The Board of Inquiry was never set up and run with that sort of thing in mind.
Which, of course, brings us to a point that I have had to state more times than I can shake a stick at concerning this forum and my position on it. Which is, I do not, have not, can not, and will not, act as a judge in matters between parties that are brought into the public eye in this forum. The reason, quite simply, is because everything posted is basically hearsay unless I have first hand experience and knowledge of the parties, the statements made, and any evidence about such statements and related practices. The ONLY time I act in the capacity of a judge is in matters related to the RULES of this site and the enforcement of them. Pretty much any registered member can post whatever they like as long as it is within the rules. Which means OPINIONS, as well as stated and/or perceived facts. Everyone reading such posts is free to make their own decision about what it is, or who, they are reading about.
What IS apparently being questioned here is the exercise of someone posting their OPINION in this public forum. And now I am apparently being demanded to be a JUDGE to make a determination of whether or not someone does, in fact, HAVE a right to their opinion remaining being posted here. Or, perhaps, whether I, and site staff acting under my direction, have a RIGHT to allow such postings to remain, regardless of what someone else wishes to take place concerning someone else's words. Which, quite frankly, would fly directly in the face of a long standing and uniformly applied policy of this site, and actually the basis for the Board Of Inquiry's popularity and credibility in this industry. Quite frankly, to even consider making exceptions to that policy would be quite damaging to the welfare and sustainability of this site because of the ensuing lack of credibility that would result. If one thread was deleted, were there others? And WHY were they removed?
As for your apparent claims concerning this thread, was there actually any libel involved? Was anything that was stated that is libelous actually going to be PROVABLY damaging to you? If you are not engaging in a business, what damages are you claiming to be at risk of? If there are damages being sustained, well, as has been implied, then your path is clear, Mr. Barnett. That is something you need to take up in the court room between YOURSELF and the person who made such damaging statements. No one else made such statements, and certainly no one else had any sort of guiding hand influencing what either party has stated. Posts are not pre-approved before being published, so they were not subjected to any sort of litmus test or peer review to determine whether or not they satisfied any sort of qualification to be posted in public. I believe you will find there is substantial case law protecting public message boards such as this from liability for third party posts made in this manner.
Anyway, sorry, posted more than I had intended, but I am sorry that you feel that you and this situation are unique. You are not. It is not. You are not the first person seemingly claiming that something was posted by another party about them that is contrary to the law. If you can prove such a claim in a court of law against the author of such statements, and a court order is issued to force me to remove damaging statements you claim were made against or about you, well, you will have to bring us to that bridge before we can even think about crossing it.
markpulawski
Active member
Same here Kenneth, I fully support removing non natives whenever possible, you are doing our eco system a favor....sadly though you are fighting a losing battle. A friend of mine just sent me a picture of knight Anole in Hawaii, can't believe someone would release such an animal but likely group of animals. Too bad we never here of some critically endangered species cropping up where they don't belong.
JerSep
New member
In alll my communication with Kenneth he has been very professional and he definitely "screened" me for proper experience with large lizards. He also made sure I understand wild Iguanas are not as "tame" as CB Iguanas. It obvious he does what he does out of love for the lizards. I plan on doing with him in a few days.
Wilomn
New member
A word of advise Kenneth. Let this one go. Right now you look pretty good. If you keep on with your current requests and veiled threats of lawsuits, the table will turn on you. MANY people here have had dingleberries start bad guy threads about them. Consider the source, then ponder the support you've gotten here and then decide if you'd rather have members here for or against you.
Anyone who forms an opinion of you solely based on the first post by the OP here is probably not someone you want to be doing business with in the first place.
Buck up Buttercup, it's the way it is on the internet.
Anyone who forms an opinion of you solely based on the first post by the OP here is probably not someone you want to be doing business with in the first place.
Buck up Buttercup, it's the way it is on the internet.
Pasodama
New member
Kenneth, I don't know if this will help at all but, here soon, this thread will no longer be on the front page and, eventually, will sink deep into the bowels, of the BOI, where it will most likely not be viewed ... unless someone does a search specifically for you. If someone were to do this, they would most likely take the to read it and will see that you are not a "bad guy".
As an example, there was one time, when I was interested in a pair of snakes, I came to the BOI and searched for the seller. Lo & behold, he had a "bad guy" thread on him. I read it and concluded that the thread/complaint was needlessly done/posted. So, I went ahead with purchasing from this fella. The transaction went flawlessly, with great communication, and I ended up with a great pair of snakes from him.
I know how much it must bother you, to have the red "X", but hope you can take comfort in knowing that this particular thread should not negatively affect you (with customers, etc.). At least not for anyone who does not mind getting a wild caught animal that is an invasive species in your area.
Personally, I do not feel that this thread is BOI worthy but, apparently, the OP does.
As an example, there was one time, when I was interested in a pair of snakes, I came to the BOI and searched for the seller. Lo & behold, he had a "bad guy" thread on him. I read it and concluded that the thread/complaint was needlessly done/posted. So, I went ahead with purchasing from this fella. The transaction went flawlessly, with great communication, and I ended up with a great pair of snakes from him.
I know how much it must bother you, to have the red "X", but hope you can take comfort in knowing that this particular thread should not negatively affect you (with customers, etc.). At least not for anyone who does not mind getting a wild caught animal that is an invasive species in your area.
Personally, I do not feel that this thread is BOI worthy but, apparently, the OP does.
Pasodama
New member
*take the time to read it
Magic
New member
Ken,
Most readers of the BOI are aware of how the board works. It's not just that a seller has a "bad rating" and therefore they're untrustworthy scum. No! The great part of the BOI is that this community requires proof and evidence, and only then- is it left up to the individual reader to decide how they feel about the particular buyer/seller.
Many trolls (of which it's my personal opinion that this Lori is) are fried into a crisp when they post things that are untrue or completely inadequate. The BOI works. It really does. It's the only fair and unbiased board we have left in the reptile community, mostly due to Rich's policy on not editing or taking sides.
Please know that some of the greats in the industry also have at one point in time that little red X next to their name on this board. The great sellers prove those red marks wrong by their actions and how they handle themselves in the coming time.
There isn't a single person worth their salt who is just going to see this red mark and automatically assume you're a bad guy. Unless they're illiterate. And in that case you don't need them anyways.
Give it time, and I'm pretty sure you'll even get a green "good guy" rating soon too!
Most readers of the BOI are aware of how the board works. It's not just that a seller has a "bad rating" and therefore they're untrustworthy scum. No! The great part of the BOI is that this community requires proof and evidence, and only then- is it left up to the individual reader to decide how they feel about the particular buyer/seller.
Many trolls (of which it's my personal opinion that this Lori is) are fried into a crisp when they post things that are untrue or completely inadequate. The BOI works. It really does. It's the only fair and unbiased board we have left in the reptile community, mostly due to Rich's policy on not editing or taking sides.
Please know that some of the greats in the industry also have at one point in time that little red X next to their name on this board. The great sellers prove those red marks wrong by their actions and how they handle themselves in the coming time.
There isn't a single person worth their salt who is just going to see this red mark and automatically assume you're a bad guy. Unless they're illiterate. And in that case you don't need them anyways.
Give it time, and I'm pretty sure you'll even get a green "good guy" rating soon too!
Chris Kennard
Well-known member
Your case is far from rare here! Matter of fact, there are a lot of bad guys with good guy posts starting with a thumbs up moniker that should have a red X! And "our lovely lady" won NOTHING! Except maybe a permanent scar on her own credibility in the eyes of many viewers here. Every post here has been positive on YOUR behalf. Wes is absolutely right. As much as I think you are a good guy, your continuing endeavor is becoming overbaring and taxing to read.
NaturalistGuy
New member
The words of advice:
________________________________________
Thank you for your words. I completely understand. And I hold no worries about any back lash. If there is one, then I probably will deserve it. I have to do, what I think is best. And I know what is best. The internet is truly wonderful- yet each person must be themselves at all turns. Backing off, or being intimidated, is not me. Never, ever. But I understand what your saying.
Thank you for the alert.
Peace out,
Kenny
________________________________________
Thank you for your words. I completely understand. And I hold no worries about any back lash. If there is one, then I probably will deserve it. I have to do, what I think is best. And I know what is best. The internet is truly wonderful- yet each person must be themselves at all turns. Backing off, or being intimidated, is not me. Never, ever. But I understand what your saying.
Thank you for the alert.
Peace out,
Kenny
NaturalistGuy
New member
The support here is fantastic. I appreciate it greatly. I have made a firm and strong decision on what I will do. I will keep this off the thread, and proceed as I had intended. Intimidation in any form, NOT to stand up for things has historically caused more trouble then the opposing outcome.
But know this to all my friends and the people that know me personally. Understanding the deeper issue here, which I know some of you do, is what is so important.
Sincerely,
Kenny
But know this to all my friends and the people that know me personally. Understanding the deeper issue here, which I know some of you do, is what is so important.
Sincerely,
Kenny
I do believe that the OP is entitled to her opinion. I strongly do not agree with it, but she has a right to say her say whether you agree with her point of view or not. And if you do not, you can say so, and many have.
Taking that right away by insisting on the selective editing/removal of threads that may be adverse to one party is damaging not only to the concept of the BOI, but to all that our freedoms stand for.
NaturalistGuy
New member
________________________________
Good points, and thank you for your words.
Entitled to her opinion YES. Being labeled a "Bad Guy" on a forum, we will have to beg to differ. I have my own, very clear, and supported idea on this situation. Someone I never sold anything to, never had a bad dealing with, never ripped off, never did anything to- posting that I was a "Bad Guy," and the subsequent Mark. The issue at hand is what the "Board of Inquiry" IS, and how it has standing in the 3rd party issue which is so often the touchstone of the text regarding this. Like Rich said earlier, it isn't for US to decide. I am only interested in one thing. And one thing alone. Having a "Bad Guy" mark against my good name and character- and nothing else. Whether I am right, or not, is something that I eventually learn. And if deemed wrong, I'll except that with grace.
Sincerely,
Kenny
NaturalistGuy
New member
"WILL, eventually learn." Sorry.
Many here may stand up for Lori's freedom, as long as she is courteous and within the rules, to express her opinion, even while at the same time disagreeing with it.
NaturalistGuy
New member
Absolutely. Lori has the freedom to post, and to comment, on her belief that selling feral/invasive lizards is against her views.
But this is not ALL that occurred.
I agree with you Lucille.
I am ALL FOR freedom of speech. But "MARKS" against one's reputation is an entirely different story in my world view, and the supported view I have at this time.
Sincerely, and thank you for your words,
Kenny
Kenny, Marks and words are similar, they both express a point of view that you already just agreed that the OP has a right to express. She may not only be against the trapping of lizards, she may think poorly of you for doing so, and can say that.
hhmoore
tired & cranky shadow
Ken,
You say you are upset about being labeled as a bad guy - I can absolutely understand that...but, given the nature of some of these posts, I am inclined to ask you a question.
What if she had posted this thread using the information icon. A light bulb rather than a red X. Would you still be disputing, and lobbying for its removal; or would you shrug it off as the outcome of your interaction with the OP? While she may disagree with the practice of capturing and selling iguanas (and other non-native lizards), that isn't why she posted. It's easy to lose track of it in all the discussion, but she posted because you were abusive in your email exchange. Her first message was pretty benign, really; but you came back calling her uneducated and silly. I'm sure there was more, but let's skim past that and consider that you told her to F off...not once, but twice.
I can understand that the you were frustrated at the type of messages you'd been receiving; but the OP's first message to you shouldn't have prompted the the response you gave. I can accept that maybe you had a bad night, and you were just fed up with those messages...but, IMO, you were out of line; and none of the self righteous explanation changes that.
I know you care about the animals; and dealing with people isn't my strongest suit, so I can relate to your reactions...but, unless there was content missing from the opening post, you owe her an apology.
You say you are upset about being labeled as a bad guy - I can absolutely understand that...but, given the nature of some of these posts, I am inclined to ask you a question.
What if she had posted this thread using the information icon. A light bulb rather than a red X. Would you still be disputing, and lobbying for its removal; or would you shrug it off as the outcome of your interaction with the OP? While she may disagree with the practice of capturing and selling iguanas (and other non-native lizards), that isn't why she posted. It's easy to lose track of it in all the discussion, but she posted because you were abusive in your email exchange. Her first message was pretty benign, really; but you came back calling her uneducated and silly. I'm sure there was more, but let's skim past that and consider that you told her to F off...not once, but twice.
I can understand that the you were frustrated at the type of messages you'd been receiving; but the OP's first message to you shouldn't have prompted the the response you gave. I can accept that maybe you had a bad night, and you were just fed up with those messages...but, IMO, you were out of line; and none of the self righteous explanation changes that.
I know you care about the animals; and dealing with people isn't my strongest suit, so I can relate to your reactions...but, unless there was content missing from the opening post, you owe her an apology.
NaturalistGuy
New member
Dear Harold,
Nah, I already said I lost it when she contacted my private email.
I have thick skin and I hope she will to.
I'm happy with how this whole thing proceed quite frankly. It helps to learn this much.
Still gotta take you to that hognose population when I'm up!!
Sincerely,
Kenny
Nah, I already said I lost it when she contacted my private email.
I have thick skin and I hope she will to.
I'm happy with how this whole thing proceed quite frankly. It helps to learn this much.
Still gotta take you to that hognose population when I'm up!!
Sincerely,
Kenny