Touchy Subject

[The BoidSmith]

I disagree, Only because I know this thread you speak of. If in fact it was only a few not a "zillion", The buyer admitted to knowing that the snake had a few mites mites before the purchase. That fact alone or that 'exaggeration" was the whole case the buyer presented. "The snake had more mites than I thought."

And you have every right to disagree! Maybe not the best example but we got hanged up on the fact that he willingly accepted a snake that had mites. The point being the snake should not have been shipped no matter how insistent the buyer was. The fault was not his for accepting the snake, it was shipping a snake with mites in the first place. Anyways, sometimes I do get tired of fighting the same fights over and over again, it's been too many years. Enough rambling for a couple of days, need a break!

Regards.

 

[kmurphy]

Often times I am very impressed with how some of the posters on the BOI weed through the crap and get to the meat of the matter.
Often the first few posts either blindly support the accuser or the accused, then relatively quickly, more pointed questions are asked and we get into it.
I remember one thread where a well thought of individual blasted a no-name because she had the gall to question him. In the end she was the one supported and her accuser just slinked away.
By the time the thread has winded its way down I feel that, most often, it ends right on target.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

Anyways, sometimes I do get tired of fighting the same fights over and over again, it's been too many years. Enough rambling for a couple of days, need a break!
Regards.

Dan, It's a good topic to discuss. I think you know, I value your opinion. We just see this topic a little differently.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

Unfortunately more times than not, the situation gets dissected rather than trying to get the problem “fixed”. Once this starts then the person reporting the bad deal or what have you, then finds he has to defend himself when he was the one who was wronged.

Yes, this is true. But let me ask you something. How are any of us suppose to know that the complaint is true without dissecting the post? If someone comes to the BOI and makes a statement like, Home Grown Herps has ripped them off! Should we immediately assume that everything they posted is true? Because if we do, by the time you actually address the thread there could be thirty posts saying that you treated that person so horrible that your reputation is shot and nobody should do business with you.

Sometimes, it's obvious who is being honest and sometimes not. That is why there needs to be someone probing for the truth. Eventually the truth finds its way out.
Are mistakes made? All the time! Is there a better system? I don't think so. Not in our community.

Just a hypothetical based in some reality.
Pretend this is a Bad Guy post on the BOI. It shouldn't be to hard because there have been several close to it.


- Dear BOI,
I just wanted to report that this guy is a very bad person to deal with. I know he has a good reputation with some of the people here and they have posted good transactions with him, but mine was horrible! I purchased a snake from him and it arrived dead! I first contacted him last week and we agreed on terms which included shipping. I waited with excitement for the driver to arrive. I was looking forward to seeing my new addition. The FedEx driver knocked on the door and when I opened the door I could already smell the stench from the box. Sure enough the snake was dead. I emailed him right away to tell him. I even took pictures and sent them. He told me he doesn't have a guarantee and will not replace my snake or give me a refund. This is a horrible person to do business with. Don't buy from him. Anyway, I found someone else to buy a sidewinder from but still need my refund.-


More than likely the first couple of responses would be.

1. That's horrible, You should receive a replacement or your money back right away!
2. That's bad business. Nobody should buy from this guy. I hope you get justice.
3. Hey, I had a good transaction with him. I don't know why he will not make good on your deal but I will contact him and let him know this thread is here.
4. Something must be wrong here. I have done business with him before and he is a great guy.

Then someone who is observing and looking at the actual details of the transactions will drop this point.

5. The FedEx driver knocked on your door? You didn't agree to ship Delta Dash? You mean to tell me that your here complaining about receiving a dead venomous snake that you illegally had shipped by ground? You endangered the lives of many and you also threatened to hurt the hobby we all enjoy. The media attention alone and the reaction from FedEx could
hurt the hobby/business for all of us.

Now this is a post I would make. It doesn't have anything do with the exact crime or bad business practice that the buyer is wanting us to address. The buyer maybe new to the forum or the hobby and will be put on the defensive until the seller joins the thread. If he ever does. Some people may see this as sidetracking the issue and the specific complaint. I do not. This is exactly what it means to self-police in this hobby. While it is true, that this seller not offering a replacement animal is wrong, the other issues in the post have a greater since of importance. At least to me. We don't reward or consider people who grossly commit a crime in everyday life.

Why should this hobby be any different?

 

[homegrownherps]

When some one comes to the BOI to report a bad deal they shouldn’t have to be “put on the defensive”. I agree that the truth should be the ultimate goal, but there also should be a limit as to how some people get treated.

And too many times the issue gets side tracked; I really don’t see the purpose of bringing up issues that have no relevance to the original issue.
If there are other issues than they should be addressed in another thread, one specifically for the “other issue”.

And I don’t think anyone should be treated differently if they commit a crime in this business as opposed to another business…. A crime is a crime, no matter what business your in, and should be treated accordingly.

 

[Scott Ashton]

When some one comes to the BOI to report a bad deal they shouldn’t have to be “put on the defensive”. I agree that the truth should be the ultimate goal, but there also should be a limit as to how some people get treated.

No, but they should be able to defend their accusation by providing details, pertinent communications/documentation, etc.

Once you make your case on the BOI it is open to scrutiny just as it would be in a court of law.

I agree with the premise that the stature of a breeder/business is a factor in discouraging some from coming forward, the TSE thread is proof, especially with some of the more recent activity. Moreover, I think that posting a "bad Guy" thread on the BOI is generally an angst evoking event. And that is NOT necessarily a bad thing. I'm not saying a breeder/business' stature should make a difference in whether or not someone comes forward with a negative experience. Rather, anyone contemplating posting a negative event on the BOI must carefully consider their case before bringing it forth.

That said, I think the TSE situation may actually be a catalyst for how people handle future problems with the "Big Guys".

 

[homegrownherps]

I am by no means knocking the BOI, I just think some people get a little to extreme. I think the truth can and should be found out.

And I think that Fauna/BOI is an asset, I would much rather see it the way it is now than not at all.

 

[Scott Ashton]

I am by no means knocking the BOI, I just think some people get a little to extreme. I think the truth can and should be found out.

And I think that Fauna/BOI is an asset, I would much rather see it the way it is now than not at all.

Indeed, things can get "hairy" sometimes.

But I think in the end it has a tendency (sometimes with a gentle nudge from management) to right itself.

Internet communication tends to go off the deep end, I believe largely due to the fact that characteristics of interpersonal communication like intonation, facial expressions, and gestures are absent. Also, with such a large distribution, the Internet provides exposure to many personalities, some of which appear not to get out much.

 

[Skunky]

When some one comes to the BOI to report a bad deal they shouldn’t have to be “put on the defensive”. I agree that the truth should be the ultimate goal, but there also should be a limit as to how some people get treated.

I definitely agree with this, if I have a genuine complaint or concern, I shouldn't have to defend myself and look like the troublemaker. I understand that you need to get the facts straight, but often that treads a fine line of accusation against the thread starter.

Ultimately, what I intended as being a thread warning others about my poor experience ends up in me looking like an idiot. This I disagree vehemently with.

 

[shrap]

Most often people get scrutinized when they do not give complete facts or their story is just not adding up.

People who come and make a complaint with detailed and accurate information are rarely attacked. They may have questions asked of them, but that is only right and fair. Otherwise one could come and make false claims about anyone and not have to provide any proof what so ever. The burden of proof is on the accuser. That is why it is so important to handle as much communication as possible via email. So you have proof.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

I am by no means knocking the BOI, I just think some people get a little to extreme. I think the truth can and should be found out.

And I think that Fauna/BOI is an asset, I would much rather see it the way it is now than not at all.

We are all in agreement on that.

 

[homegrownherps]

What about when your dealing with a well known breeder and you don't save your emails because the LAST thing you expect from a top/well known breeder is to be taken, use TSE as an example.

I let (one breeder in particular) take a pair of, at the time high end corns. Agreed to wait on payment until after his eggs started hatching (the wait was to be about 2 months).....well, 6 months later I practically had to threaten to come to his home and do what it took to get paid. He paid a little here and a little there, and eventually got paid..but why should we sometimes have to go to those extremes. Not to mention I would see this breeder at most of the Florida Expos.

Our transaction was 100% over the phone, how does one prove "phone calls" on the BOI? Since theres no proof - am I now the bad guy because I have no proof to offer ?

 

[shrap]

Jim

It dont make you the bad guy at all. It just helps to have as much proof as possible. Just like in a court of law, if you have no proof to back up your claims it is hard to decide who is telling the truth. It is purely relying on each persons word.

 

[homegrownherps]

It dont make you the bad guy at all. It just helps to have as much proof as possible. Just like in a court of law, if you have no proof to back up your claims it is hard to decide who is telling the truth. It is purely relying on each persons word.

Ok, so me not being that well known, and certainly not a "Top" breeder - if I were to make a claim on not getting paid by a top breeder for animals given to him on good faith just because he was a top breeder as well as someone whom I have dealt with in the past with no problems, and also know of many others who have done so w/o any complications.

Would I get the benefit of the doubt w/ no proof to offer, or will the breeder have the benefit because he is well known as a good guy?

I know there are a few people here that would vouch for me and there are many other that do not come here that would as well. But I am certain that the top breeder knows more people than I do in this hobby/industry.

So would it come down to who knows who ?

 

[shrap]

People really dont care what the bystanders have to say as far as them cheer leading one side or the other. It really dont mean anything.

Well you BOTH would be listened to. And people would try to draw the truth out. Way more often than not the liar is going to trip himself up somewhere along the line. The Bill Leverton thread is a perfect example. Bill tripped himself up so many times it was laughable. And Bill was a "Good Guy" and well respected up until that point.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

Ok, so me not being that well known, and certainly not a "Top" breeder - if I were to make a claim on not getting paid by a top breeder for animals given to him on good faith just because he was a top breeder as well as someone whom I have dealt with in the past with no problems, and also know of many others who have done so w/o any complications.

Would I get the benefit of the doubt w/ no proof to offer, or will the breeder have the benefit because he is well known as a good guy?

I know there are a few people here that would vouch for me and there are many other that do not come here that would as well. But I am certain that the top breeder knows more people than I do in this hobby/industry.

So would it come down to who knows who ?

Jim, I understand your concern here. I think it only lends credibility for the need sometimes to examine posts and ask the necessary questions. You see its human nature for those to trust the word of those they know or have had good experiences with. So when you see a thread like the one you are describing and the accused is denying the claims, that's when some questions that are a little provoking come in.

More often than not, as Sammy stated, those questions will draw out the truth.