Regarding the GGC polls

[hhmoore]

There has been some discussion recently about when people should vote on a GGC poll. Rather than go more in depth in the BOI thread where it came up, I want to continue the discussion here - where we can take a better look at things, and deal both with specifics and generalities.

What follows is MY opinion, and should not be construed as anything else.

The wording in the thread What this is all about and HOW to apply (at the top of the BOI Good Guy Certification Forum) states:

Quite simply, any business or person applying to take part in this program has to agree to do "good business". This is something that is subject to interpretation, but in it's most simplest form, simply means to treat your customers well and in a manner that will speak highly of the way you do business.

Does "doing good business" mean that we have to approve of one's business model, if they try to do right by their customers? I'm going to use this recent case as an example - General Exotics is a broker, and many of us have negative feelings about brokers in general. Does this mean that he should get negative votes, and have his certificate pulled? I'll be the first to admit that brokers have little if any control over the animals that are sent to their customers. Same goes for the packaging and shipping. Combined, that opens up a lot of opportunity for unhappy customers. However, if the broker (generic term, not referring to General Exotics in particular) offers a good guarantee, and honors it appropriately, can he not be considered to do good business...even if we dislike the fact that he isn't doing anything but playing middleman, and never sees the animals he is selling?
Don't get me wrong - I don't like that business plan either...but is that what this is really about? Or is it about how a GGC holder conducts his business issues. Maybe it's me; but if the broker is making the effort to keep his customers happy, especially in bad situations, is he still automatically a bad guy? Granted, if it comes to pass that numerous people are receiving deceased or sickly animals, it would become a factor even if the broker is replacing/refunding.
What about when complaints are brought to the BOI? At what point should people start thinking about voting on a GGC? For me, I generally only vote if I have personal experience OR if it has been clearly demonstrated that a person is good or bad. Anybody can manage to complete a handful of problem free shipments...when they manage to consistently get good reviews, and handle the bumps in a way that reflects positively on them, then they are a Good Guy. Does a complaint, or a couple of complaints, make them a Bad Guy?? I think it depends on the situations, and how the person handles it. This may not be a popular answer, but I'm not convinced that a refund or replacement is ALWAYS the right choice...even if it is what the customer wants. In the right circumstances, one can remain a good guy without caving to demands/requests.
IMO, there is some room for error - we all make mistakes at times. Mistakes don't make somebody a bad guy unless he/she doesn't learn from them. If one continues to make the same mistakes.

Votes on these polls can not only affect the GGC status, they can potentially impact business. Voters and GGC holders should both be aware that votes don't have to be permanent. A person with a 100% positive rating can see his poll shift to the negative if he screws up badly enough, or often enough. By the same token, if a person has a lot of negative votes, hopefully the ones that voted don't just forget about it if the GGC holder improves his game enough to merit reconsideration.

I didn't post this to be a diatribe, but rather to open the topic for discussion. I know people have some different views...this is the place to talk about them.

 

[deborahbroadus]

From my perspective, simply put the GCC is a "recommendation."

I interpet "Good Business" as being able to answer yes to the following questions

1. Would I feel confident purchasing from the business in question?
2. Can I ethically recommend their services to another?
3. Do I feel confident that the animals would survive the shipping procedure more times than not/are shipped humanely?

The business in question and other businesses that fail the test are rated "Bad Guys" in my book. While it may impact their businesses negatively to be rated BG, it also may prevent other animals and customers from having to suffer unnecessarily AND if they are wise and view the BG rating as a tool that measures how well they are doing, it can also affect a change. Perhaps the business in question will make some changes in their business model.

In a nutshell, while how a business handles issues that may arise does have a large impact on whether I would view Breeders/Middlemen/ as good guys, I also take into account how much risk is involved from the animals and customers perspective. IMO, having the final part of selling the animal out of the dealer's hands leaves much risk for the customer and animal.

 

[RJK890]

My Opinion...

I really do not give much, actually any merit to the GGC.
It is simply a popularity vote.
The idea behind it is great, but just like the BOI, it can be, and is abused and neglected.

The Abuse:
People vote "Yes" for their "friends," and those that their "friends / clique" approve of, whether or not they have ever done business with them.
They also vote "No" for those that they or their "friends / clique" do not like or approve of, whether or not they have even done business with them.

Example: Brian calling for everyone to go and vote against GE's GGC before the BOI thread had a chance to play out. Last I saw, at least two people had done it.

The neglect:
Once people vote "Yes" or "No", they do not keep up with the GGC thread.
Once the issue is resolved, and / or the popular vote is changed, they never change or remove their vote.

There can be "Good Guys" without a GGC, and "Bad Guys" with one.

At least in the BOI you can see exactly who is saying what, and their reason for saying it.

Example:
If someone has a "Bad Guy" thread, you can see if it is simply because the masses agree that the "BG" does not fit in with the current clique, or if they have actually taken someone's money and not delivered the product, sent out sick animals, sold false hets, or some other deed worthy of being labelled a "Bad Guy."
You can also see if someone is part of the current clique and has a "Good Guy" thread where the masses sing their praise, however there is an unresolved problem or poor business ethics that get overlooked because they are part of the "in crowd."

Both forums are pretty much a court of public opinion.
I do check both buyers and sellers out on the BOI before doing business with them, but I only give weight to whether or not they have, again, actually taken someone's money and not delivered the product, sent out sick animals, sold false hets, or some other deed worthy of being labelled a "Bad Guy." As well as how they conduct themselves in those threads.
The GGC means nothing to me...

 

[brd7666]

Great post Herald. Personally, I thought General Exotics was ragged on pretty hard, and in some cases undeserving. The biggest problem that I saw was the second shipping charge. If you have a live arrival guarantee, then there should not have been a second shipping charge.

If you don't like a middleman, then don't buy from them. I have been to several wholesalers down in the Miami area, and they do not sell to the public, and they don't sell on Fauna or other sites that I am aware of. So a business can buy from them and resell, some may even drop ship. There is absolutely nothing wrong with drop shipping, especially if you trust your supplier. From what I understand frogs are not the easiest animal to ship.


You know, it just kills me, some people will use a middleman as a shipping service, but that's o.k.

A middleman is a middleman, and I don't care what the service is. When you do business with a middleman you are never dealing directly with the company providing the product or service.

If it doesn't agree with you, then don't go there. What works for one, may not work for you. Just because it doesn't work for you, does not mean it's wrong.

You, me, and whoever have the right to choose who we want to do business with, even if others disagree with it, and that's the bottom line.

 

[Lucille]

I did a search and there has already been quite a bit of discussion about the certifications and votes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karen Hulvey
It has EVERYTHING to do with the topic of this thread.
If you HAVE NOT DONE BUSINESS with a person, is it right to give them a good guy or bad guy vote? That is the freaking question.

And here is the "freaking" answer.

YES. You do NOT have to have done business with a person or business in order to vote on the Certification Poll nor the Traders Ratings. Simply because it would be impossible to enforce anyway, and fruitless to attempt to do so. How could you possibly do that? It would require that this entire system would need to be a closed loop system, much like Ebay, in that ONLY people buying from people advertising here, within this very site, with a valid transaction ID would be eligible to vote. That means anyone buying or selling something on another site would be immune to your OPINIONS here, no matter what took place there. In my opinion, that just is not a feasible method to incorporate into the Certification system. It would be way too narrow in focus, and terminally self limiting to anyone really wanting to use it.

I had to read over the Certification welcoming thread myself to refresh my memory about any constraints I may have applied to the utilization and participation in the program. It's been a while since I wrote that, and I might suggest that anyone interested do the same for themselves: 1. What this is all about and HOW to apply.

Please read that post. Particularly the paragraph describing the Certification system as a "BOI Lite". Does the BOI require a business transaction in order for you to post your opinion there?

Really, I don't see anything at all about such a requirement of a specific business transaction. That is because I knew it would be an impossible restriction on the system. Even if such a system were feasible here, I personally think it is a tossup as to whether such a system would be a better or worse one then one that is open to subjective opinions such as this one is now set up.

Obviously, Good Guys WILL go bad on occasion. We've seen it happen before, and it will certainly happen again. If they have 50 Good Guy votes, do you really want to have to wait for 51 people to get screwed before the Certification is revoked? Who exactly would be well served by such a system limitation? How quickly do you want the votes to reflect this turn of events to help protect other people, maybe even yourself? Wouldn't a PROACTIVE early warning system NEED to be able to react quickly to be effective?

Is it perfect? Of course not. Can if be abused? Of course! And probably will be, both intentionally and accidentally. Is it worthwhile? Beats me, you tell me. If not, tell me how to make it better, more accurate, and more efficient. Or, if you prefer, convince me that it needs to be scrapped completely. I had no idea where it would go when I set it in motion. I only had hopes it would help. But I am definitely not married to the project if it turns out to just be a real bad idea.
__________________
WebSlave

*TRUE* Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner....

 

[brd7666]

I just want to add something here. It's my opinion of what seperates a good guy from a bad guy. I think that there are times where someone is quick to jump the gun, and give someone a bad guy vote for their GGC.

First of all, everyone makes mistakes, myself included, it's part of being human.

Some people give a bad guy vote before a person has a chance to correct their problem. People new to the industry can take certain things for granted, and do things that people that have been in the business think are unacceptable. If someone is legitimitly making honest mistakes, and then correcting them, how can you fault them for that?


For example, someone starts a bad guy thread about someone on the BOI. They start it to hopefully bring it to everyone's attention, and maybe the outcome will be good in the end. Before the accused gets a chance to correct the problem, people are voting bad guy in the GGC. If he corrected the problem, is he really a bad guy? So if someone fixed a problem, and you gave them a bad guy vote, how can you continue to justify that?

Everyone makes mistakes.

What seperates a good guy from a bad guy?

A good guy learns from his mistakes, and tries to correct the situation so that it doesn't happen again, he makes the necassary changes becaues he is learning as he goes. So those who learn from their mistakes and do right, are good guys.

A bad guy knows he is making mistakes. Even when they are pointed out, he continues to make those same mistakes, knowing that they are wrong. He generaly doesn't care about others and is only in it for themselves. Lying, cheating, stealing, and so on, are the norm for them.

I think people should not be so quick to judge people in every situation. Not all situations are the same. I know for a fact that I have been quick to judge in some cases, and I was wrong in doing so.

We are never to old to learn. It's what you do with what you learn that makes you who you are.

 

[StrictlyExotics]

I applied for a GGC a couple of months ago but never received an answer one way or another. I was thinking that it would be a cool way to advertise Fauna on my website as well. Now, this was a couple of months ago when I applied and I felt a little differently about it.

But, I guess what I am getting at is it doesnt play a role in whom I do business with simply for the fact that it doesnt seem kept up with, nor do many people in the business, or on Fauna for that matter, get it.

 

[deborahbroadus]

I just want to add something here. It's my opinion of what seperates a good guy from a bad guy. I think that there are times where someone is quick to jump the gun, and give someone a bad guy vote for their GGC.

First of all, everyone makes mistakes, myself included, it's part of being human.

Some people give a bad guy vote before a person has a chance to correct their problem. People new to the industry can take certain things for granted, and do things that people that have been in the business think are unacceptable. If someone is legitimitly making honest mistakes, and then correcting them, how can you fault them for that?


For example, someone starts a bad guy thread about someone on the BOI. They start it to hopefully bring it to everyone's attention, and maybe the outcome will be good in the end. Before the accused gets a chance to correct the problem, people are voting bad guy in the GGC. If he corrected the problem, is he really a bad guy? So if someone fixed a problem, and you gave them a bad guy vote, how can you continue to justify that?

Everyone makes mistakes.

What seperates a good guy from a bad guy?

A good guy learns from his mistakes, and tries to correct the situation so that it doesn't happen again, he makes the necassary changes becaues he is learning as he goes. So those who learn from their mistakes and do right, are good guys.

A bad guy knows he is making mistakes. Even when they are pointed out, he continues to make those same mistakes, knowing that they are wrong. He generaly doesn't care about others and is only in it for themselves. Lying, cheating, stealing, and so on, are the norm for them.

I think people should not be so quick to judge people in every situation. Not all situations are the same. I know for a fact that I have been quick to judge in some cases, and I was wrong in doing so.

We are never to old to learn. It's what you do with what you learn that makes you who you are.

However, keep in mind, the members can always remove, change the BG vote. So, simply because one voted BG does not always mean that one isn't giving a business a "chance" to make corrections. Some of us realize that saying one is or will be making changes, and making a few visible changes does not mean that one has actually changed. More evidence of ACTIONS is needed.

For example, stealing pictures and posting them isn't a "mistake" neither is manipulating words to give the wrong impression. I would classify the latter as an attempt to con people and the words are usually very carefully chosen.

I guess what I am trying to say is that while the BG vote may have been put up before the business has had a chance to make the needed chances, it is there for a good reason. My reason would be: Until the changes are made and customers have been satisfied for a period of time, I couldn't ethically recommend a business that I would not buy from myself to anyone else.

 

[hhmoore]

I've passed your situation along to Rich, Dean.

I think that your comment regarding people not getting it is fairly accurate...and, worse, many that do get it just don't think about it. I'm as guilty as anybody in that regard. There are a number of people I think do good business that have gotten Good Guy Certificates, and I haven't voted on their polls. Why?? Simply because I wasn't paying attention to the fact that they had gotten them. Whether it is because I don't visit their website often (or at all), or because I don't periodically scroll through the list to see who's new; the end result is the same.
Now, I'm not the type to randomly endorse a person/business based upon a few random posts or chat sessions, and there are lots of people with GGCs that I don't know a darn thing about...so, when I do go through the listings (after all this moving nonsense is finished), I'll probably only vote on a handful of polls. The thing is if more of the people that CAN vote in those polls actually did, the polls themselves would be more useful as a feedback tool. I'd be willing to bet that there are more than a few polls with no votes at all on them.

 

[StrictlyExotics]

I have personally looked at most of the polls regarding GGC's and, like the BOI, its one of the great tools that seperates Fauna from the rest. I, too, would like to see more activity regarding them. Dont get me wrong, I am 100% FOR all of the tools Fauna has to offer. I would just like for us as, as members (primarily contributors), to become more proactive in helping Fauna continue to grow in the right direction.

In a sense though, I do agree with Robert Kelly because there are people (not anyone in particular) that I think would vote against someone just because they dont like them personally. In a way, I would like ot see some sort of... (for lack of a better word) rule change or implementation that it would be more governed by our already over-worked mods to make sure people arent "over-voting" against people just because they have the capability to do so.
Just my opinion...

 

[hhmoore]

Hmmm.
The problem I see with that is that it would likely come off as mod's protecting people. That's why I tried to make it totally clear that my statement in the General Exotics thread was my opinion, and an official statement by a moderator.

 

[StrictlyExotics]

Hmmm.
The problem I see with that is that it would likely come off as mod's protecting people. That's why I tried to make it totally clear that my statement in the General Exotics thread was my opinion, and an official statement by a moderator.

What I mean Harald is for mods to be able to check to make sure that no one specifically is just going through and listing people as a vote of no only. For instance, if someone has voted no to 10 people, they should have an almost equal amounts of yes votes too. Obviously with only 260 GGC's out there currently, it wouldnt be too hard to maintain and watch votes.

And personally, from what I know of you, you try to stay unbiased and I would respect a decision that you would make.

 

[WebSlave]

I applied for a GGC a couple of months ago but never received an answer one way or another. I was thinking that it would be a cool way to advertise Fauna on my website as well. Now, this was a couple of months ago when I applied and I felt a little differently about it.

But, I guess what I am getting at is it doesnt play a role in whom I do business with simply for the fact that it doesnt seem kept up with, nor do many people in the business, or on Fauna for that matter, get it.

Which is exactly the reason that I have a substantial list of applicants for the GGC and haven't had much interest in setting them up. I would bet I could go through the current GGC's and most would be disqualified because their paid membership has lapsed anyway.

I didn't set this up for ME, I set it up to help you all. If you don't want it, then that is perfectly fine by me. It's a pain in the ass to maintain anyway.

 

[StrictlyExotics]

Thank you Rich for creating my GGC. I posted the link to the poll on my FB acct and it went over well. I actually received a bunch of questions from Fauna Members regarding how to get one so I would anticipate that you may have some new GGC applicants, as well as possible contributing members very soon.

Sorry if this creates more work for you... LoL

 

[Southern Wolf]

What I mean Harald is for mods to be able to check to make sure that no one specifically is just going through and listing people as a vote of no only. For instance, if someone has voted no to 10 people, they should have an almost equal amounts of yes votes too. Obviously with only 260 GGC's out there currently, it wouldnt be too hard to maintain and watch votes.

And personally, from what I know of you, you try to stay unbiased and I would respect a decision that you would make.

By your logic... I am abusing my power to vote... as I have only voted one time ... and that was a BG vote on General Exotics. The reason that I voted was because of them trying to use a play on words and not being total honest about their business. Basically trying to make them look like something they are not. As I stated in the BOI thread... once he corrects his site and is totally honest then I will remove the BG vote. The ONLY reason I even knew he had a GGC is because it was brought up.

 

[deborahbroadus]

Thank you Rich for creating my GGC. I posted the link to the poll on my FB acct and it went over well. I actually received a bunch of questions from Fauna Members regarding how to get one so I would anticipate that you may have some new GGC applicants, as well as possible contributing members very soon.

Sorry if this creates more work for you... LoL

You posted it on FB for your friends to vote for you?

Just Kidding..remembering what you posted up earlier....

 

[StrictlyExotics]

By your logic... I am abusing my power to vote... as I have only voted one time ... and that was a BG vote on General Exotics. The reason that I voted was because of them trying to use a play on words and not being total honest about their business. Basically trying to make them look like something they are not. As I stated in the BOI thread... once he corrects his site and is totally honest then I will remove the BG vote. The ONLY reason I even knew he had a GGC is because it was brought up.

No Kevin, what I meant was if, say you had 10 votes and ALL of them were "no" then yeah, it would be abuse considering that you have no yes votes for anyone. Sure, you are entitiled to shun businesses and vote no for everyone you wish, but, there has to be some sort of common ground. At some point, the negativity has to be met with some positives to equal itself out.

You posted it on FB for your friends to vote for you?

Just Kidding..remembering what you posted up earlier....

Actually Deb, most of my actual friends on FB are contributing members here at Fauna . I dont think that those people would vote for me unless they were willing to do business from me. In fact, I know for sure that a couple of them have bought from me too.

 

[joseydiann]

Actually Deb, most of my actual friends on FB are contributing members here at Fauna . I dont think that those people would vote for me unless they were willing to do business from me. In fact, I know for sure that a couple of them have bought from me too.

I only see 2 votes for Dean, one being mine. And yes I'd buy from Dean any day!