That is fair and reasonable. So assuming that there are enough third party complaints and evidence presented to prove without a doubt that Dealer X is selling illegally/inhumanely hacked snakes, will you continue to allow that person to do his bad business on your site?
Actually this is a rather complex question to answer. Not sure I can give it the time it deserves for an answer, but let me take a stab at a short answer and hope it suffices.
Short answer:
Yes.
Short explanation: From the beginning, I have made it a point to try to avoid acting in the capacity of a judge in matters that are presented on the BOI. I feel people can post all the information they feel is pertinent, and then it is up to the readers themselves to make their own decisions about what is going on. To be consistent, I feel this should be extended as well to cover those items listed on the classifeds. Of course, this is all based on extrapolation of how I have handled things here in the past, but I make no claims to know what is BEST to do. All of this is only my gut feeling and hope that it is the best course to take.
As a for instance, I have been asked that if I were presented with indisputable proof that something someone had posted on the BOI was a lie, would I delete it? The answer has always been "no". When threatened with legal action if I do not remove something posted on the BOI, my response has always been that if provided with a court order to do so, based on real judge's determination of the facts presented by both parties, then yes I would delete such a post. I believe to be consistent, I would have to extend this same policy to such issues that would crop up within the classifieds sections.
Although in many ways I try to run this site in a democratic manner (51 percent of the majority should be followed), such cannot always be the case in all things. In those respects, this site would act more as a constitutional republic, in that decisions, somtimes at odds with a majority, would be governed by the "constitution" which created this site, or in reality, the rules that were made after the fact to keep it fair and even handed in pursuit of its original goals. Or at least as much as is possible. The reason for this is that there is no natural law that says a majority will always be right, something the founding fathers of our country fully recognized when they wrangled the US Constitution into life.
Now if someone were selling something patently illegal, where the actual offering of sale of the item is illegal, then yes, I believe I would have no recourse but to stop such actions. But is the actual sale of a venomoid done in an illegal manner illegal itself? I don't know, but I doubt it. Is it illegal for someone to BUY a venomoid from someone who did the surgery illegally? Again, I don't know, but I doubt it. In such a case, I would have no legal grounds to block such an action, now would I? Already there are offers of venomous animals for sale on this site. Are all the sellers legally licensed to own those animals? Are they all going to people who are legally able to possess them? I don't know, and I really can't see any feasible to determine that. Heck, how many corn snakes are sold to people who live within states where they can't legally own them? Is it my responsibility to determine that as well? There are wild caught animals being sold which may have been collected and kept in very inhumane conditions before being offered for sale. Should I take a stand and block them as well? Or suppose some pet shop who habitually tells its customers to feed crickets to corn snakes wants to buy from someone advertising on this site. Shouldn't I block that too?
Exactly which part on that slippery slope should I place my foot first?
I took a look at the classified ads of my local newspaper yesterday morning and saw several ads selling guns. Now there are some people which it is actually illegal to sell guns to knowingly. But is the newspaper going to get into the middle of every transaction like that? No, certainly not. And in like respect, neither should I with the ads posted here. Would I be incensed if that local newspaper decided to just not run any gun ads, because of the chance of abuse, or even just because the owners just happen to not like guns? Darn tootin I would! I wouldn't like anyone filtering such things from me based on some ethical platform they have climbed up on, forcing upon me their views of what they think is best for me. I am an adult and like to make my own decisions, thank you. Just let me have access to all of the information, and I'll take it from there.
So in a similar vein, thinking along those lines, how can I possibly justify taking a position where I would block ads on this site based on some ethical position, no matter how right it may be to many people, and how many may support it, without being a hypocrite? Where exactly is that line that will divide fairly the complete freedom for people to post their legal ads, from where I become a tyrant who blocks ads based on whatever ethical platform happens to be in vogue today? I And once I cross that line, where exactly do I stop? What will be next on the list?
Gee, glad I didn't give you a LONG answer......
