• 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....

Trader's Ratings promotion

Here is what I propose to do, as the B2B model makes a certain amount of sense. I could argue both sides myself, to no better conclusion than the model as you have it implemented.

"Offer to buyers that are not subscribers of Faunaclassifieds: If by the end of 2018 (December 31st) you spend a total at Kapidolo Farms that exceeds $250, I'll refund $25 of your purchase accumulation if you demonstrate that you have become at least a 'contributing member'. The purpose of this offer is to prompt your 'rating' for my own or other entities posting goods and/or services here on Faunaclassifeds. Of course everyone wants a positive review, but that is your choice as to what the review will say in terms of your own experience.

Refunds for cost of subscribing/membership will be by whatever method(s) you used to pay for goods from Kapidolo Farms. In any case your claim to a refund must be fully tendered by 31 January 2019. The evidence accepted will be a posted trader rating for any seller that you have done business with by 31 December 2018.

Go to this link for membership subscriptions http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/payments.php"

I'll put this at the bottom of every add I post until 1 December 2018. Any objection? This will give all the outhouse attorney here mch to talk about. I'll only do this with your saying it's okay with you Rich Z.. It seems pretty win-win to me. Maybe other traders will adopt the model? Maybe not.

Will, Biologist
Kapidolo Farms
 
Kapidolo Farms said:
Here is what I propose to do, as the B2B model makes a certain amount of sense. I could argue both sides myself, to no better conclusion than the model as you have it implemented.

"Offer to buyers that are not subscribers of Faunaclassifieds: If by the end of 2018 (December 31st) you spend a total at Kapidolo Farms that exceeds $250, I'll refund $25 of your purchase accumulation if you demonstrate that you have become at least a 'contributing member'. The purpose of this offer is to prompt your 'rating' for my own or other entities posting goods and/or services here on Faunaclassifeds. Of course everyone wants a positive review, but that is your choice as to what the review will say in terms of your own experience.

Refunds for cost of subscribing/membership will be by whatever method(s) you used to pay for goods from Kapidolo Farms. In any case your claim to a refund must be fully tendered by 31 January 2019. The evidence accepted will be a posted trader rating for any seller that you have done business with by 31 December 2018.

Go to this link for membership subscriptions http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/forums/payments.php"

I'll put this at the bottom of every add I post until 1 December 2018. Any objection? This will give all the outhouse attorney here mch to talk about. I'll only do this with your saying it's okay with you Rich Z.. It seems pretty win-win to me. Maybe other traders will adopt the model? Maybe not.

Will, Biologist
Kapidolo Farms
Click to expand...

Just so we are on the same page, you are making a reference to a "B2B model". I am interpreting that as meaning "business to business". If that is true, then no, that is not the case at all here. Private individuals can and do becoming higher level members, which provides the perk of utilizing the Trader's Ratings system. They do not have to be a "business" at all.

Your proposal doesn't cause me any heartburn. The purpose of this thread was to make note to people that I am making my own efforts to promote the Trader's Ratings system. So I would guess that more people participating in such a promotion of their own, would be helpful to this site too.

So, good luck with your plan. I am curious to see how this works out for you.

And thank you.
 
Kapidolo Farms said:
My error, the paypal fees matter was "Karma", what is that?
Click to expand...

Karma is feedback other users give on an individual post. You give it by clicking on the icon I've indicated using the box.

It's akin to a "Like" on Facebook, and the more positive karma you get, the more green bars you get under your name. If you have net negative karma then you get red bars.
 

Attachments

  • fckarma.png
    fckarma.png
    45.9 KB · Views: 189
WebSlave said:
Unless, of course, one or more people can convince me of something I haven't thought of that would actually be detrimental to this site.
Click to expand...

I noticed that a recent recipient of a BOI thread, John Carr, has a positive trader rating by you.
I do think that just as everyone should read an entire BOI thread prior coming to any conclusions, likewise, people should carefully read the trader ratings to see why they were received.
Had you given him (or anyone) your personal positive rating based on a good transaction, that would weigh heavily (to me) in the favor of the person rated because of your knowledge and experience.
But this rating was based on a membership purchase and I believe you have refunded that purchase price.

I would like you to consider removing that rating because I believe it may be misleading, he does not have the positive transactions to back it up and he is no longer financially supportive of your site.
 
bcr229 said:
I think you meant John Farr (dogshead3) and I do agree.
Click to expand...

Yes, the combination of no editing, poor eyesight, and lack of sufficient coffee contributed to the misspelling, thank you for correcting that.
 
Lucille said:
I noticed that a recent recipient of a BOI thread, John Carr, has a positive trader rating by you.
I do think that just as everyone should read an entire BOI thread prior coming to any conclusions, likewise, people should carefully read the trader ratings to see why they were received.
Had you given him (or anyone) your personal positive rating based on a good transaction, that would weigh heavily (to me) in the favor of the person rated because of your knowledge and experience.
But this rating was based on a membership purchase and I believe you have refunded that purchase price.

I would like you to consider removing that rating because I believe it may be misleading, he does not have the positive transactions to back it up and he is no longer financially supportive of your site.
Click to expand...

Well, I do see the logic of what you are saying, and my first reaction was to just leave it be. After all he did make the payment for a sponsorship, and that does help to support this site, for which I am thankful for. And it would seem to be rather petty of me to remove the positive feedback solely because of his later libelous (IMHO) comments about this site.

However, on the other hand he DID request a refund, did he not? With that in mind, such a request would mean that he was withdrawing his support of the site. And shouldn't I, in like turn, also withdraw my now negated gesture of appreciation for his withdrawn support?

Of course, on the third hand, would this open up a big 'ole sinking can of worms from people who also had something go sour on them after they used the Trader's Ratings system to show a positive transaction that later went bad on them?
 
I appreciate that you have read and considered my post. I do think a positive trader rating for Mr. Farr may be misleading if readers use it to forecast behavior on his part, but I also feel that anyone who actually looked into his, or anyone's, trader ratings would most likely be familiar with the BOI and its support for community opinion, and have the information posted there available to help them in their decisions.


I am very supportive of the trader ratings where buyers and sellers rate each other. And I'm supportive of most of the programs that encourage financial support here because this is a wonderful site and you have worked tirelessly to make it that way.
But I feel about the promotion the way I feel about the history of purchased indulgences or present day political contributions, but fortunately God, the New York Times and the BOI help level the field.
 
Point of the matter is that no matter who paid for a membership or sponsorship, whether they were the worst of the worst, according to Board of Inquiry standards, I would still be obligated to give them a positive Trader's Rating regardless. To not do so would then put me in the position of a judge, and have to choose who gets a good rating and who does not based on third party information posted in one or more BOI threads. In the manner in which I have chosen to do this, the evidence is black and white: Someone pays for a membership or sponsorship, then they have made a POSITIVE contribution to this site. No "ifs", "ands" or "buts" about it. Very simple, easy and fool proof, I figured. What could possibly go wrong with something this easy and apparently a win-win for everyone?

:samurai_01:
 
WebSlave said:
Point of the matter is that no matter who paid for a membership or sponsorship, whether they were the worst of the worst, according to Board of Inquiry standards, I would still be obligated to give them a positive Trader's Rating regardless. To not do so would then put me in the position of a judge, and have to choose who gets a good rating and who does not based on third party information posted in one or more BOI threads.
Click to expand...

I totally understand and agree with the concept of avoiding liability due to the 'judge' issue. Though, in this case, the payment was refunded.


WebSlave said:
What could possibly go wrong with something this easy and apparently a win-win for everyone?
Click to expand...

Going into it, the promotion did seem like a great idea, and then the issue with Farr occurred.
The risk in doing nothing (with only the promotion part of the ratings) post Farr is that readers may see it as a way for skunks to buy perfume (or actually be misled by the sweet scent). They may possibly then discount the actual ratings part of the trader rating program which I think is a valuable tool.
Or they may investigate to see why each rating was given, and may discount only the promotion ratings as perfume instead of seeing the original intent which was to honor those who help this site.
Or maybe I'm overthinking all this and the ratings may pass unnoticed.
 
I would hope users would review what the actual ratings are for and also review any references and BOI threads as well as any other avenues available to them before doing business with someone. Simply because someone was being rude or did a bad deal, doesn't mean whatever positive action was taken in the past should be wiped from the slate. Just as someone who did good shouldn't have past bad marks removed. It's up to individuals to do their due diligence before spending hard earned money with someone. IMO
 
Lucille said:
I also feel that anyone who actually looked into his, or anyone's, trader ratings would most likely be familiar with the BOI and its support for community opinion, and have the information posted there available to help them in their decisions.
Click to expand...

AbsoluteApril said:
I would hope users would review what the actual ratings are for and also review any references and BOI threads as well as any other avenues available to them before doing business with someone. IMO
Click to expand...
Hopefully, everyone does read all the available information.
 
After due consideration, I decided that someone paying for a sponsorship, then retracting their support by asking for a refund AND threatening a lawsuit is sufficient grounds for me to withdraw my positive Trader's Rating. The fact that this person was also libeling this site (IMHO) was supporting incentive for me to flip the rating from a POSITIVE to a NEGATIVE.
 
Your thoughtful decision is well done, and no broader than it had to be. You are a smart guy.
 
Back
Top