Though I was contemplating resurrecting this thread in 15 months, I guess I’ll just have to find something else to do in October of 2006.
Where to start? I’ll back track a little to Chris’ return post and then I’ll pick it up from where I last posted.
Chris Steele said:
I don't really care about whether or not my name is bad here. I have nothing to prove and at that time I got fed up about being questioned and it's the reason I've been away from the internet selling and buying for so long.
Yet your feedback and closed bids over on ReptiBid shows you selling on 7 different occasions since then, two of which occurring only a month ago, and also, one purchase. I guess you weren’t
THAT fed up. Could his statement above be untrue?
Chamco said:
Dave,
I thought that I read the whole thread last night, so when you say of Chris "By the way it is the crooked individuals (be it stealing, scamming, lying, omitting, misrepresenting, etc...) like yourself who give this industry a bad name", can you just reference to me where he stole, scammed, and lied? I think that some omission and misrepresentation here was possible
I guess it’s all how you interpret things. My opinion is if someone purposely omits or misrepresents something then it is lying and therefore scamming. Taking money for said misrepresented item would then be stealing.
Chris Steele said:
John, I will get some good underside photos up Monday. Its late and I will be gone all day sunday.
Did these pictures ever surface? Hmmm…could that have been a lie?
Chamco said:
That he chose to not return to the thread for many months could be indicative that he was quite put-off by many of the comments, which seems very reasonable to me, especially since he was a kid.
Why you need to ask me questions is beyond me. You appear to know what everybody is thinking and feeling.
Could it also be indicative of someone who has lied and misrepresented an animal and has something to hide now that it has been brought to everyone’s attention?
Chamco said:
Frankly, I thought that your play on words about his name "Steele" actually better said "Steal" was very over-the-top. Did he steal?
Refer to my comment above.
Chamco said:
And for the other gentleman, I am going to have to disagree with your conclusion that "attacks" keep the hobby straight. I think that blessing is a bit broad. No doubt that the BOI and other forums allow for the "outing" of scammers, etc. But many "attacks" here and elsewhere lack the professionalism to help anybody or anything. Many people avoid commenting or posting here because too many threads disintegrate into gutter attacks, or become hijacked beyond the ability of many of us to follow. I think many out there share my annoyance with having become involved in a thread, only to then see it run well beyond its useful life, and fill my in-box with tit-for-tat posts that run for days and pages beyond their livelihood.
Again you appear to think you know what others are thinking and feeling.
You can simply hit the unsubscribe button at any time.
And your choice of words “tit-for-tat posts” was rather humorous.
Chamco said:
Chris, you are young in this hobby. I don't think your integrity suffered in the eyes of most from this year-old thread. Possibly some mistakes made, but you'll learn, like the rest of us. Best of luck in your future.
Again with your vast knowledge of what “most” are thinking.
Chamco said:
Enlighten all of us who failed to see Chris as anything worse than a then 15-16 year old who had his auction hijacked.
Again, see my comments above.
Also, his auctions (the ones prior to and after this one) should never have been conducted. It is against the TOS for a minor to have a membership.
Article 1.
Eligibility of membership - This auction site is only available to people who are legally able to form binding contracts with you and the seller/buyer of an auction item.
People who are of under age of 18 are not eligible for membership due to security precautions that can result as of those members. If you do not meet these requirements, you are not eligible to use these auction services.
Chamco said:
Laura, I thank you for your comments, and only wish more here adhered to such a noble pursuit as "We are here to protect the business that we love, and if there is a lack of integrity, morals, and ethics, we will call you and any one else out." Unfortunately, many who post who can claim no more morals than having paid a few bucks and too having much time on their hands.
One who coddles, condones, enables and supports someone who lies, misrepresents not only his animals but himself, is a great representative for this industry and should think twice before speaking of morals, integrity and ethics.
Chamco said:
Chris,
Wouldn't want to deter you from participating as a buyer-vendor anywhere.
By all means condone and encourage him continue to participate "anywhere".
Chamco said:
Be sure you are in accordance with any posted rules, and by all means practice the best ethics possible.
Do you really think that your holding of his hand and telling him; it's okay, the big bad bully won't bother you anymore, has had any effect? What makes you think he is going to change his ways now? Oh, that’s right, you know how people feel and what they are thinking.
Chris Steele said:
Really David, if you aren't angry then why persist? I mean I try not to let it bother me and I tried to fix it by apologizing,
Fix what? If you didn’t do anything wrong then what are you trying to fix and apologize for?
Chris Steele said:
but your eager persistence in trying to get me to blow my top and show my youthful behavior is getting to me.
I guess Jim F. is rubbing off on you. You seem to have acquired his uncanny powers of knowing what others are thinking, feeling and what their intentions are.
Chris Steele said:
"The likes of me" I'd like to see the day when your can truthfully say you are any better, smarter, or anything than me
Welcome to that day. All the above and then some.
Chris Steele said:
David, one thing I can show you. It isn't just me that thinks you are overboard. You have a warning level of 9 due to your uncalledfore, aggressive attitude
You are not showing me anything but your naivety and your feeble attempt at manipulation.
Chris Steele said:
My warning is not for malicious behavior. His is, that was my only point, not that he should be labelled as a bad guy. Obviously he is a good breeder with a bad attitude.
If calling out those who are being dishonest is aggressive and labels me as someone with a bad attitude then label away.
Chamco said:
Jim O,
Like all others, this is only my opinion, but if I may quote your reply to Chris "Your argument is a weak one because it fails to take into account the hundreds of helpful posts that he has made.". The "he" here refers to Dave, where Chris has pointed out Dave's lack of professionalism and warning points. In the broad sense, maybe Chris' argument is not relevent. But within this thread, its quite on the mark.
Actually his argument is
NOT relevant within this thread. This thread is about his misrepresentation on an auction, which has evolved to include his inability to do what he said he was going to do, (i.e. post the pictures) and now the knowledge of his misrepresentation of himself (by omission, but misrepresentation nonetheless),
NOT about myself, my professionalism nor my warning points.
Chamco said:
If Dave has informative, helpful, and inciteful posts elsewhere, then good for him. In this thread he has made unsubstantiated accusations, called someone names like a you'd expect to hear on a grammar school playground, belittled someone because of their age, and presented himself as an all around troll.
Jim,
Pease quote where I “called someone names like a you'd expect to hear on a grammar school playground”. I must have missed something but I have only read this thread once while you have read it twice.
The troll comment is quite ironic if not hypocritical coming from you.
Chamco said:
In other recent "helpful" threads, he has felt it appropriate to post pictures of weed and black kettles, to belittle someone there who admitted to a past marijuana conviction and provide us with other "childish" nonsense. I use "childish" as it seem so ironic to Dave's jabs at Chris.
Are we starting to see a pattern here? Jim F. is now defending Ryan, Chris and even took it upon himself to make excuses Paul (A Select Few).
Yet you can make jabs at me? That’s okay? Double standard or hypocritical?
Chamco said:
Its a shame that someone as informative as Dave has to litter the BOI with all this nonsense. Dave's posts in this thread were neither informative or helpful, just ignorant, and at times malicious. I would implore Dave to come back to this thread, call me every name in the book, and then get back to the issue of Chris and his actions, and more specifically Dave's labeling him as being a thief, liar, and scammer, which are completely unsubstantiated by the thread. But when did that ever stop "Helpful Dave"!
It’s funny how my opinion is litter, nonsense, ignorant and malicious and yours in not. I would have thought instigative would have been included too.
Jim O said:
Perhaps you have an issue with Dave or a love for Chris.
He does seem to have a few comments as of late about my posts. Perhaps having paid a few bucks and having too much time on his hands is the cause?
Chamco said:
Chris has been on topic, responding to the petty posts and attacks from Dave. You choose to come to Dave's defense, pointing out his "helpful" side. It is very much Chris' perogative to resurrect any thread in which he was falsely accused. Its his reputation to defend, for better or for worse.
Chamco said:
I respect Chris and his composure throughout this recent resurrection of a thread where he took some heat.
Suncoast Herpetological said:
Jim
While there are arguments you have broached that have some merit, I take issue with the items highlighted above.
1.) We have no idea if Chris was "falsely accused" He stated so several months ago and promised to post pics to prove his assertions. In fact, I was the one who asked for those additional pictures that he agreed to supply, After a post that promised them within 48 hours, he promptly disappeared for 14 months. I would hardly characterize that as "falsely accused".
2.) I agree that it is his reputation to defend. However, the time to defend it was when the situation occurred. He has no credibility here anymore on this topic. Over done with gone....no one cares about his guilt or innocence at this point. He shot the wad on that over a year ago.
3.) I agree that Chris has showed reasonable composure this time around. However, giving him kudos for it is ridiculous in that it was hime who resurrected a dead and buried thread for no logical reason since he had nothing material at all to add to it other than "i'm back, be nice to me"
No one either cared or would have noticed that he was back Jim. 100% of the negative attention he drew to himself was caused by that idiotic post. You can say what you like about the boy but this entire situation is completely on him.
John saved me some typing. I could not have said it any better and I agree 100%.
Chamco said:
Am I on a horse? Its not necesary to be on anything to be above Dave's comments here.
More jabs and tit-for-tat posts huh? Not to mention contradictive to your own statement.
Suncoast Herpetological said:
Definitely a point we will never agree on Jim. The kid came back to stir the pot, plain and simple. I have no idea what his motivation was.
Personally, my opinion of someone who is accused of misrepresentation of an animal, vehemently denies the accusation, then offers to post proof that he is innocent, then immediately disappears off the face of the earth without providing the promised proof, is that he is probably guilty of exactly what he was accused of.....misrepresentation with intent to defraud and blatant lying. Is he a thief based on this? Absolutely not. Duplicitous and not to be trusted?...probably.
I guess it’s all one’s interpretation. If you sell someone a male when they are expecting and paying for a female in my opinion it’s stealing. It would be no different then having healthy leos pictured and sending very thin and 1 missing part of it’s tail instead. This example was prompted by viewing his feedback on ReptiBid where it is claimed he did just this scenario during the time he was “fed up” and “away from the internet selling and buying” scene.
Suncoast Herpetological said:
By offering to post the requested pics last year, Chris assumed the onus of proving his claims. He didn't follow through. Therefore, as I said earlier, he has no credibility here and popping this thread up to bluster and strut about his name being disrespected was just plain stupid.
Again, I agree.
Suncoast Herpetological said:
Incidentally, I agree that David came out with both guns blazing which might have been a bit of an over reaction. However I don't disagree with the sentiments, just the vehemence of the delivery.
Again I say, the kid asked for it and he is getting what he asked for.
Well, I again I have to agree with what John has written. I may be a little intense when dealing with such issues but unlike Jim F.’s assumption it is
NOT done maliciously. Just because I come straight at those who want to play outside the rules instead of holding their hand doesn’t make me a bad guy with malice I heart. I believe that by 16 one should know the difference between right and wrong and by then the time of holding one’s hand has passed.
Chamco said:
I wish he had followed through then with more pictures, but failure to do so does not make him a crook in my book. Others may certainly look at it all, and put Chris on a list to never do business with, based on his posts then or now.
Seems like you have selective understanding that someone interprets something one way while another could interpret it another.
Chamco said:
I am glad that Chris finally came back to tell Dave what he could do with the stupid playing with his name. Dave's got plenty of moronic posts in this thread, and rate as being as unprofessional as any I have seen lately.
You must have missed reading a few of your own posts there buddy. I really got your knickers all knotted up haven’t I? “You do seem a bit worked up though!”
Chamco said:
If nothing else, maybe Dave can pick on someone his own size with his stupidity. You're right, I don't draw the same conclusions as you, but do feel that you and I are an example of respectful disagreement. Dave's post were nothing but BS.
Where to start with these three sentences? I guess I’ll start with Jim F.’s claim of my stupidity. Please substantiate your claim of my stupidity. Though it is your
prerogative to refuse this request and not
necessary nor
relevant to this thread, please give us all your
insightful observations. (Oh by the way smart guy, the following words: perogative, necesary, relevent, inciteful are a few of the words misspelled by you in your recent posts. I just used them all in one sentence and spelled them correctly in hopes you learn by seeing and example) Oh damn, there I go picking on someone intellectually smaller than me again.
Claiming you are an example of “respectful disagreement” is a farce at best.
Chris Steele said:
This will be my last post on this thread.
Until October 2006 if you continue with your past posting behavioral pattern.
Chris Steele said:
I am answering the question about what became of this snake. I sold it to a local friend as a pet, as far as I know it hasn't been sexed since before it was in my hands.
Very convenient your “friend” was the winning bidder.
Chris Steele said:
I disagree though that I got what I deserved, it is never ethical to bring someones family name into the picture. Even if I were to be a convicted murderer it would still be very disrespectful and unprofessional. I don't mind anything thats been posted of me, but I have to admit the fact that I enjoyed seeing the nature of the person that made that pun on my name.
This whole statement is so ridiculous. So lets get this straight, I am unethical for bringing your family name in to the picture? I was unaware of this. I must have missed that memo. I guess then you are just as unethical for bringing my family name into the picture too, or more so already knowing it was unethical and had previously received the memo pertaining to this rule.
You admit to enjoying seeing the nature of the person that made the pun on your name. Yet, you are guilty of doing the same exact thing to my name. You claimed you wrote it to show me, to bring it to my attention right? No different then what I was doing to you. How can what you did be right and what I did be wrong?
Chris Steele said:
David, my 'sorry' is still up for grabs. Maybe you did just have a bad day, if so, just let me know and I'll know to respect you. We do all make mistakes and go overboard, no one is perfect, especially me.
Again with the sorry. Sorry for what exactly?
