[B]BOI about to be NO more![/B]

For those of you also on fauna, you have probably already heard about this. The BOI will most likely no longer be in existance very soon due to lack of funding to keep it going. If this happens, our only other option is to turn to bp.net Inquiries/Feedback for posting good guy/bad guy reports for business transactions.

You must be logged in to fauna to see the thread but if you go there its in the BOI section titled The future of the BOI.

If we lose this we must all take advantage of THIS forums feedback and create another "BOI" persay. For all our sakes. Its very important to know who you are dealing with. To know you will not be scammed. So please continue to take advantage of BOI while we still have it but also please use this forum as well. In case we do lose the BOI, so we will still have this important info.

Thanks ~Monica

Do the admins on BP-net really want a BOI here?

There is a potential financial liability that comes with running a forum like the BOI.

Hopefully you ran your post by the admins before you asked people to use this site as an alternate BOI.............

If this website can't hold a BOI, we have to try to find another way to have or make one..
It's extremely important IMO, but Skiploader is right, it is a financially difficult thing to do and would take a lot of effort from the Admins and owners of this forum.

Edit: Can you link the thread that talks about this?
I can't find it.. and I am logged in.

wow.. fauna losing the BOI?????

How can getting rid of the BOI save them money?

I can't believe that might happen, I mean, classifieds and the BOI are the most important parts of fauna.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

wow.. fauna losing the BOI?????

How can getting rid of the BOI save them money?

I can't believe that might happen, I mean, classifieds and the BOI are the most important parts of fauna.

---

Aside from the time and effort required to moderate a forum like the BOI, it exposes the owner to potential financial liabilities -i.e. litigation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

wow.. fauna losing the BOI?????

How can getting rid of the BOI save them money?

I can't believe that might happen, I mean, classifieds and the BOI are the most important parts of fauna.

---

My generally humble opinion is that the site owners are using the death of the BOI to drum up money for themselves in the form of memberships. Not that this is unreasonable by any means, but a little less than forward. It seems unlikely that they are paying that much for for a server to hold text information.

Not a computer wiz, just throwing in my pennies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skiploder

do the admins on bp-net really want a boi here?

There is a potential financial liability that comes with running a forum like the boi.

Hopefully you ran your post by the admins before you asked people to use this site as an alternate boi.............

---

47 u.s.c. § 230

also to a tidy sum of

approx $42325

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soterios

My generally humble opinion is that the site owners are using the death of the BOI to drum up money for themselves in the form of memberships. Not that this is unreasonable by any means, but a little less than forward. It seems unlikely that they are paying that much for for a server to hold text information.

Not a computer wiz, just throwing in my pennies.

---

Read the first paragraph of this:

http://fins.actwin.com/aquatic-plant.../msg00278.html

Then this:

http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailta...d/14688,-1.php

......and then tell me if you still think Rich is drumming up anything.

Forum members and owners can and are sued by people who they criticize on these forums.

With the number of Bad Guy threads posted on Fauna, it's a matter of time before someone decides he's going to see how far he can go pushing back.

If only there were someone, any one, a student even, who knew the law, or thought they did, or might someday if they keep on studying....if only there were one of those.....

Of course, he's got loosewheel to help him out over there.

Maybe that's part of the problem....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiploder

Read the first paragraph of this:

http://fins.actwin.com/aquatic-plant.../msg00278.html

......and then tell me if you still think Rich is drumming up anything.

Forum members and owners can and are sued by people who they criticize on these forums.

With the number of Bad Guy threads posted on Fauna, it's a matter of time before someone decides he's going to see how far he can go pushing back.

---

the code i posted does not give members imunity but it does for isp and other service providers!
a company suing members of a forum has nothing to do with the other

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiploder

Do the admins on BP-net really want a BOI here?

There is a potential financial liability that comes with running a forum like the BOI.

Hopefully you ran your post by the admins before you asked people to use this site as an alternate BOI.............

---

Well Skip, we already have an Inquiries/Feedback section.. Isnt this what its for? To pass on info about good or bad transactions between others? It is already being used to some extent in the exact same way the BOI is used. I know if i purchase from someone (like i just did & awaiting shipment) I will post a good rep on him right here on bp.net. So why not?

People are allowed to give their opinions about others. This site is very closely moderated and when someone is obviously out of line, the situation is addressed immediately.

If this area of bp.net were to become more like the BOI it would need obvious rules. To prevent people just bashing others for no reason. This rule is already in affect. Every post is read by a moderator. How would it be any different than it is now?

Maybe a better idea would be like kingsnake.com posting rules.. Only paid members can post. Lowering the chances of scammers.

Its just very hard to grasp the fact that we may lose the BOI.

Here is the exact post with the link below it..

"A couple of days ago I shut down all of the BOI forums on this site in order to get a message across that seemed to be lost in all the static here. I have been dropping hints for months now, but I guess most people didn't put two and two together to realize what they really meant.

In effect, there is a very strong chance that the BOI will be going away permanently. I am retiring my reptile breeding business no later than January 1, 2010, and at that time this site needs to be financially self sufficient to cover the legal and financial liabilities that the BOI is exposing me to for YOU benefit. Let's face it, when I have retired from my reptile breeding business, I really won't need the BOI at all, and if it still exposes me to a lot of financial liability afterwards, it just doesn't make sense for me to bear up under that threat just to help out everyone else here. I just am not willing to shoulder that burden alone when my income will be limited to pretty much my retirement savings. I expect I can make enough money from this site via advertising and the like to help a little with making ends meet, but that could all be wiped out (and then some) if I should have to hire an attorney to fight a lawsuit filed by someone who gets incensed enough over something someone else has posted HERE about them. Yes, I am protected by federal law against legal liability for third party posts, but that only helps me WIN a court case, it is not a protection against the expenses that will be incurred FIGHTING that lawsuit. I would still need to hire an attorney and go to court, regardless. Which could be very expensive. Definitely more than I would want to have to draw out of my retirement funds, let me tell you.

Sorry, but I have no intention of mine and Connie's retirement RUINED because I have given you all the ability to post here in this capacity. So if you aren't willing to pick up most of that burden, then quite frankly, the BOI will be gone. I'm still working on the details of how to do that shutdown in an orderly fashion, and much of that conversation takes place in this thread in the FEEDBACK forum -> http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...d.php?t=139468

So the ball is in your court now. Between now and January 1, I will have to come to a decision on whether the BOI stays or goes, and quite frankly, that decision will be based on the number of paying memberships this site has which I consider a DIRECT measure of the members support for this site and the BOI.

Sorry it has to be this way, but I have looked at this from every angle I can think of, and there appears to be no other alternative.

Thank you all for being here over the years, whichever way this goes.
__________________
WebSlave"

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...d.php?t=139742

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

Here is the exact post with the link below it..

"A couple of days ago I shut down all of the BOI forums on this site in order to get a message across that seemed to be lost in all the static here. I have been dropping hints for months now, but I guess most people didn't put two and two together to realize what they really meant.

In effect, there is a very strong chance that the BOI will be going away permanently. I am retiring my reptile breeding business no later than January 1, 2010, and at that time this site needs to be financially self sufficient to cover the legal and financial liabilities that the BOI is exposing me to for YOU benefit. Let's face it, when I have retired from my reptile breeding business, I really won't need the BOI at all, and if it still exposes me to a lot of financial liability afterwards, it just doesn't make sense for me to bear up under that threat just to help out everyone else here. I just am not willing to shoulder that burden alone when my income will be limited to pretty much my retirement savings. I expect I can make enough money from this site via advertising and the like to help a little with making ends meet, but that could all be wiped out (and then some) if I should have to hire an attorney to fight a lawsuit filed by someone who gets incensed enough over something someone else has posted HERE about them. Yes, I am protected by federal law against legal liability for third party posts, but that only helps me WIN a court case, it is not a protection against the expenses that will be incurred FIGHTING that lawsuit. I would still need to hire an attorney and go to court, regardless. Which could be very expensive. Definitely more than I would want to have to draw out of my retirement funds, let me tell you.

Sorry, but I have no intention of mine and Connie's retirement RUINED because I have given you all the ability to post here in this capacity. So if you aren't willing to pick up most of that burden, then quite frankly, the BOI will be gone. I'm still working on the details of how to do that shutdown in an orderly fashion, and much of that conversation takes place in this thread in the FEEDBACK forum -> http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...d.php?t=139468

So the ball is in your court now. Between now and January 1, I will have to come to a decision on whether the BOI stays or goes, and quite frankly, that decision will be based on the number of paying memberships this site has which I consider a DIRECT measure of the members support for this site and the BOI.

Sorry it has to be this way, but I have looked at this from every angle I can think of, and there appears to be no other alternative.

Thank you all for being here over the years, whichever way this goes.
__________________
WebSlave"

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/foru...d.php?t=139742

---

The money shots are bolded.

The question remains - do the admins here want a BOI?

here is the actual code(i cant link to it so its copyed from http://uscode.house.gov ):
-CITE-

47 USC Sec. 230 01/03/2007

-EXPCITE-

TITLE 47 - TELEGRAPHS, TELEPHONES, AND RADIOTELEGRAPHS

CHAPTER 5 - WIRE OR RADIO COMMUNICATION

SUBCHAPTER II - COMMON CARRIERS

Part I - Common Carrier Regulation

-HEAD-

Sec. 230. Protection for private blocking and screening of

offensive material

-STATUTE-

(a) Findings

The Congress finds the following:

(1) The rapidly developing array of Internet and other

interactive computer services available to individual Americans

represent an extraordinary advance in the availability of

educational and informational resources to our citizens.

(2) These services offer users a great degree of control over

the information that they receive, as well as the potential for

even greater control in the future as technology develops.

(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer

a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique

opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for

intellectual activity.

(4) The Internet and other interactive computer services have

flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of

government regulation.

(5) Increasingly Americans are relying on interactive media for

a variety of political, educational, cultural, and entertainment

services.

(b) Policy

It is the policy of the United States -

(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and

other interactive computer services and other interactive media;

(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that

presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer

services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation;

(3) to encourage the development of technologies which maximize

user control over what information is received by individuals,

families, and schools who use the Internet and other interactive

computer services;

(4) to remove disincentives for the development and utilization

of blocking and filtering technologies that empower parents to

restrict their children's access to objectionable or

inappropriate online material; and

(5) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws to

deter and punish trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and

harassment by means of computer.

(c) Protection for "Good Samaritan" blocking and screening of

offensive material

(1) Treatment of publisher or speaker

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be

treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided

by another information content provider.

(2) Civil liability

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be

held liable on account of -

(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict

access to or availability of material that the provider or user

considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively

violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not

such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B) any action taken to enable or make available to

information content providers or others the technical means to

restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).(!1)

(d) Obligations of interactive computer service

A provider of interactive computer service shall, at the time of

entering an agreement with a customer for the provision of

interactive computer service and in a manner deemed appropriate by

the provider, notify such customer that parental control

protections (such as computer hardware, software, or filtering

services) are commercially available that may assist the customer

in limiting access to material that is harmful to minors. Such

notice shall identify, or provide the customer with access to

information identifying, current providers of such protections.

(e) Effect on other laws

(1) No effect on criminal law

Nothing in this section shall be construed to impair the

enforcement of section 223 or 231 of this title, chapter 71

(relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation

of children) of title 18, or any other Federal criminal statute.

(2) No effect on intellectual property law

Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit or expand

any law pertaining to intellectual property.

(3) State law

Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent any State

from enforcing any State law that is consistent with this

section. No cause of action may be brought and no liability may

be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with

this section.

(4) No effect on communications privacy law

Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the

application of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986

or any of the amendments made by such Act, or any similar State

law.

(f) Definitions

As used in this section:

(1) Internet

The term "Internet" means the international computer network of

both Federal and non-Federal interoperable packet switched data

networks.

(2) Interactive computer service

The term "interactive computer service" means any information

service, system, or access software provider that provides or

enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server,

including specifically a service or system that provides access

to the Internet and such systems operated or services offered by

libraries or educational institutions.

(3) Information content provider

The term "information content provider" means any person or

entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation

or development of information provided through the Internet or

any other interactive computer service.

(4) Access software provider

The term "access software provider" means a provider of

software (including client or server software), or enabling tools

that do any one or more of the following:

(A) filter, screen, allow, or disallow content;

(B) pick, choose, analyze, or digest content; or

(C) transmit, receive, display, forward, cache, search,

subset, organize, reorganize, or translate content.

-SOURCE-

(June 19, 1934, ch. 652, title II, Sec. 230, as added Pub. L. 104-

104, title V, Sec. 509, Feb. 8, 1996, 110 Stat. 137; amended Pub.

L. 105-277, div. C, title XIV, Sec. 1404(a), Oct. 21, 1998, 112

Stat. 2681-739.)

-REFTEXT-

REFERENCES IN TEXT

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986, referred to in

subsec. (e)(4), is Pub. L. 99-508, Oct. 21, 1986, 100 Stat. 1848,

as amended. For complete classification of this Act to the Code,

see Short Title of 1986 Amendment note set out under section 2510

of Title 18, Crimes and Criminal Procedure, and Tables.

-COD-

CODIFICATION

Section 509 of Pub. L. 104-104, which directed amendment of title

II of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) by

adding section 230 at end, was executed by adding the section at

end of part I of title II of the Act to reflect the probable intent

of Congress and amendments by sections 101(a), (b), and 151(a) of

Pub. L. 104-104 designating Secs. 201 to 229 as part I and adding

parts II (Sec. 251 et seq.) and III (Sec. 271 et seq.) to title II

of the Act.

-MISC1-

AMENDMENTS

1998 - Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 105-277, Sec. 1404(a)(3), added

subsec. (d). Former subsec. (d) redesignated (e).

Subsec. (d)(1). Pub. L. 105-277, Sec. 1404(a)(1), inserted "or

231" after "section 223".

Subsecs. (e), (f). Pub. L. 105-277, Sec. 1404(a)(2), redesignated

subsecs. (d) and (e) as (e) and (f), respectively.

EFFECTIVE DATE OF 1998 AMENDMENT

Amendment by Pub. L. 105-277 effective 30 days after Oct. 21,

1998, see section 1406 of Pub. L. 105-277, set out as a note under

section 223 of this title.

-FOOTNOTE-

(!1) So in original. Probably should be "subparagraph (A)."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Skiploder

The money shots are bolded.

The question remains - do the admins here want a BOI?

---

and yes thats a cop out it! wouldnt cost much to petition for dismissal
and it doesnt typically require a court visit. not to mention that he should already have a lawyer on retainer.

Quote:

---

(2) Civil liability

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be

held liable on account of -

(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict

access to or availability of material that the provider or user

considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively

violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not

such material is constitutionally protected; or

(B) any action taken to enable or make available to

information content providers or others the technical means to

restrict access to material described in paragraph (1).(!1)

---

So what your saying, Nixer, is that there cannot be any legal action taken against users or providers of info posted by others? All the legal jargon is a bit confusing but this looks like there should be no financial liability involved. Please correct me and clarify if im wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

So what your saying, Nixer, is that there cannot be any legal action taken against users or providers of info posted by others? All the legal jargon is a bit confusing but this looks like there should be no financial liability involved. Please correct me and clarify if im wrong.

---

what this section of the Communications Decency Act was to protect the internet service providers when someone does something while using their service. before this section was added you were only not liable if you didnt edit (hence author) posts.

they can attempt to sue and may actually get a scumsucker to attempt to file it but there is already many cases that have been dismissed without going to court under this clause.

now this does not stop a person who is flaming someone else from being sued

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nixer

what this section of the Communications Decency Act was to protect the internet service providers when someone does something while using their service. before this section was added you were only not liable if you didnt edit (hence author) posts.

they can attempt to sue and may actually get a scumsucker to attempt to file it but there is already many cases that have been dismissed without going to court under this clause

---

Huh.. Well my post on this in the forum feedback section was removed. So i guess someone is not happy with the idea of any "BOI" related threads on this forum. Legal liability or not. I wonder what kind of limits will be put on THIS forum for posting rep's for someone if the BOI does disappear.

Its still very disappointing to think we may lose it. If we do, we will just need to rely on fellow breeders/buyers/sellers to give us permission to post them as a referral if we post animals for sale etc..

Which many im sure would do, but this seems a bit self defeating as well. It would be like advertising for someone else on your own add.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

Huh.. Well my post on this in the forum feedback section was removed. So i guess someone is not happy with the idea of any "BOI" related threads on this forum. Legal liability or not. I wonder what kind of limits will be put on THIS forum for posting rep's for someone if the BOI does disappear.

Its still very disappointing to think we may lose it. If we do, we will just need to rely on fellow breeders/buyers/sellers to give us permission to post them as a referral if we post animals for sale etc..

Which many im sure would do, but this seems a bit self defeating as well. It would be like advertising for someone else on your own add.

---

yes but feedback posts should be kept to to a point and not just turn into a flame war like so many do which is where members open themselves up for poss. legal ramifications

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nixer

yes but feedback posts should be kept to to a point and not just turn into a flame war like so many do which is where members open themselves up for poss. legal ramifications

---

Which is why it should be a thread similer to the for sale threads here.. Meaning no replies are allowed. The member should simply be able to say so-n-so is good seller/good buyer etc.. Thats it. No chances for recourse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

Which is why it should be a thread similer to the for sale threads here.. Meaning no replies are allowed. The member should simply be able to say so-n-so is good seller/good buyer etc.. Thats it. No chances for recourse.

---

I don't think that's a good idea, it doesn't give others the chance to hear`the other side of the story.

Just my .02

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

Which is why it should be a thread similer to the for sale threads here.. Meaning no replies are allowed. The member should simply be able to say so-n-so is good seller/good buyer etc.. Thats it. No chances for recourse.

---

i was think more along the lines of actually sticking to the facts i.e.
good/bad
reason/issue with the animal
and when a problem arises it should be left between the buyer and seller not the click-by slammers which never gets an issue settled

I stand corrected, I didn't know he was retiring.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

Huh.. Well my post on this in the forum feedback section was removed. So i guess someone is not happy with the idea of any "BOI" related threads on this forum. Legal liability or not. I wonder what kind of limits will be put on THIS forum for posting rep's for someone if the BOI does disappear.

Its still very disappointing to think we may lose it. If we do, we will just need to rely on fellow breeders/buyers/sellers to give us permission to post them as a referral if we post animals for sale etc..

Which many im sure would do, but this seems a bit self defeating as well. It would be like advertising for someone else on your own add.

---

It was pulled, because it was a duplicate, essentially of this one. The admins have been aware of the BOI's tentative demise since Rich first started talking about it. I am about to head to bed and have a foggy brain right now because of Nyquil, but I'm sure that someone from the Admin team will weigh in more later with some feedback, regarding this topic.

As Robin pointed out, the one thread was removed because it was essentially a duplicate of this one...as it gets really confusing to have two identical thread discussions running at the same time. If we wanted to keep anyone from talking about it, then this thread would be gone as well. ;)

It is true that we have our own Inquiry/Feedback forum. However, it is NOT a copy of the BOI and is not intended to be so. It's run with an entirely different set of rules and procedures. At this time, we've no intention of changing that.

I have communicated with Rich regarding the fate of the BOI and offered whatever help BP.net can give to continue to support the BOI and keep it running and open to the public as a free tool. Rich has neither rejected nor accepted any help from us at this time. Beyond that, there is little else we here at BP.net can do. It may very well turn out that the BOI stays up and running for years to come. Just because Rich said it MAY have to close on Jan 1st doesn't mean that it will. I believe it is premature to publicly discuss alternate BOI plans when it's not at all certain that the BOI is going to end.

The administration of BP.net is not unaware of what is going on at Fauna and we are fully conscious of Rich's plans for retirement and what that could mean for the BOI as we know it today. It's our hope that things will work out so that Rich and Fauna and the BOI can continue to fulfill Rich's original vision for the Board of Inquiry and it will remain where it is, as it is...for as long as the community needs it to. But we are also aware of the chance of it coming to an end. Just because we're not making any public statements regarding the prospect does not mean we are not considering the impact to the herping community and considering ways that BP.net can help fill any gaps left should that unfortunate end occur. But these admin talks are NOT a matter for public discussion.

I thank you all for your support of BP.net...and I am happy to suggest that anyone concerned about losing the BOI also throw your financial support to Fauna as well. Hopefully it will stay put for years to come.

I just read this and I'm speechless. Does freedom of speech not apply to the internet? Both Novak and Resler were American... How is it legal to sue someone for what they write?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icygirl

I just read this and I'm speechless. Does freedom of speech not apply to the internet? Both Novak and Resler were American... How is it legal to sue someone for what they write?

---

Not all laws make sense.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icygirl

I just read this and I'm speechless. Does freedom of speech not apply to the internet? Both Novak and Resler were American... How is it legal to sue someone for what they write?

---

freedom of speech does not apply to us commoners it only applies to the media or so it seems.
slander and deformation of character isnt legal

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by icygirl

I just read this and I'm speechless. Does freedom of speech not apply to the internet? Both Novak and Resler were American... How is it legal to sue someone for what they write?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackcrystal22

Not all laws make sense.

---

And yet, even for the simplest of matters, one must pay a mouthpiece to represent them in court. Win or lose, the mouthpiece is paid.

It's a pretty sucky thing when you can't defend yourself because the other side has a legal "expert" looking for ways to subvert what is right.

We all know right from wrong, lie from truth.

Sigh....sometimes people just suck.

Does anyone really use the BOI much anymore? I don't see much activity over there any more. Not even close to what it used to be.

Eh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wilomn

And yet, even for the simplest of matters, one must pay a mouthpiece to represent them in court. Win or lose, the mouthpiece is paid.

It's a pretty sucky thing when you can't defend yourself because the other side has a legal "expert" looking for ways to subvert what is right.

We all know right from wrong, lie from truth.

Sigh....sometimes people just suck.

Does anyone really use the BOI much anymore? I don't see much activity over there any more. Not even close to what it used to be.

Eh.

---

Agreed, it's all a big shame.

Wow.. Well I just really dont know what to say now... I understand everyones opinions and points of view. I also understand where the admins are coming from on this. Until its a definate, its just hearsay i suppose. Im always up for a good informational debate but the more i read the more i see everyone has good points. I do think all the leaglities are a bit silly and some just plain out of line... Whats new right?

Im not sure what we'll do if we do lose the BOI but i guess we'll figure it out when we get to that bridge.

I just don't see Rich as the type of guy lining his pockets by threatening to shut down the BOI. From what I can tell, he's just too good of a guy to do that.

The problem with the BOI is that everyone wants to use it, but doesn't want to pay for it. I bought a membership there initially to be able to post ads (back when posting ads wasn't free). Then I wanted to become BOI good guy certified, and to also be able to leave feedback for others (which you have to be a member to give trader feedback or vote in BOI polls) so I've kept up my membership.

I think its an important service, and quite frankly, I wish more people would cough up the $25 a month (only 6.8¢ a day) to keep the service going and to be able to participate in feeder tradeback and BOI voting. I'd rather spend that money and be able to research anyone I'm purchasing from before buying. $25 a year is a lot cheaper than getting scammed or sick animals from someone you didn't know is shady.

I know its saved me from several purchases (*cough* Big Daddy Reptiles and Powerhouse Reptiles *cough*) that I was thinking of making before seeing the BOI threads. W/o that service I probably would have bought from both of them, and possibly ended up regretting it.

all you have to do is speak with big daddy reptiles and that hsould save you from purchasing

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Denial

all you have to do is speak with big daddy reptiles and that hsould save you from purchasing

---

Ok i have to admit i did look him up too. He's posting some great deals on kingsnake. But i decided to go with Bradford Cole. Justin K. And a couple other breeders with good reps. I did actually email him inquiring about a couple animals but his reply seemed a bit too... Well you know what i mean. I have joined fauna forums but i never use it so i didn't pay to use the BOI. Who knows. Maybe i should. But i think we all should if thats the only way to save it. Problem is. His post on the subject bothers me. He makes it sound like becoming a paid member wont matter to the future of that particular forum. Im a bronze member of USARK As well as platinum member right here. Read rich's post closely. How many of you actually believe if i pay to join that it will do any good? Seriously. I want to know your opinions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draigess

How many of you actually believe if i pay to join that it will do any good? Seriously. I want to know your opinions.

---

It only takes a drop of water to raise the level of the ocean.

You may be right. Or there may be 100 people thinking "It's probably too late, so why bother?" when if maybe those 100 people joined that could save it. I don't know.

I think Rich should make a post saying how many memberships would be required to keep it going for another year, or how much money is needed to cover all his bases. Then that might be more incentive if it was a reasonable amount of people needed to sign up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Apple Herps

I think Rich should make a post saying how many memberships would be required to keep it going for another year, or how much money is needed to cover all his bases. Then that might be more incentive if it was a reasonable amount of people needed to sign up.

---

Never gonna happen.

The BOI is still worth while but is a far cry from what it was, which while somewhat rough was much more effective in helping those who had been scammed and outing those who wanted to be scammers.

It's a pale shadow now.

rich likes this game. He's played it for years and I seriously doubt he'll stop.