Dennis Hultman dabbles in more than reptiles BAD GUY

[ReptileEmpire]

I can understand Matt posting what he thought was noteworthy (the criminal actions of a member of this forum),

Actually, I personally beleive that Matt knew this was not the same Dennis, and posted this out of spite.

At least can the moderator please change the title if this must remain? Word it to say "Dennis Hultman: Case of mistaken identity". Someone searching on this name for a reference (as I am sure I would do), but not wanting to read 16 pages of he/said she said would assume there is an issue and move on to another breeder.

And I have a different point of view on this as well. I have every intention of purchasing from Dennis H as soon as he has something I want. I have not done business with him before, nor personally met him, but the fact that he has handled this in such a great way makes him someone I look forward to dealing with.

Matt on the other hand, has basically confirmed what many were beginning to think over the last few weeks. My transaction with Matt wasn't completely bad, extremely slow but I at least received what I ordered. But dealing with someone that conducts themselves in this manner is not something I am willing to do. I purchased some more heating equipment from Rich at Reptile Basics Monday afternoon, and I had a tracking number Tuesday morning. Thanks again Rich.

Casey Tevebaugh

 

[ReptileEmpire]

And here I thought I had found this great smiley that was just perfect for this thread, but Rich beat me to it while I was typing.

 

[Chameleon Company]

All that may be well and good Rich, but your example of Matt having self-inflicted wounds here for all to see require that a viewer of the BOI actually read a few posts. In the meantime, the real possibility also exists that a casual browser of the BOI front page may have interest in reading other threads, and pass over this thread with only a glance at the header, as they never heard of either party, and do not anticipate doing business with either. Down the road, they may only recollect the name "Dennis Hultman ... Bad Guy" if they see an ad from Dennis, or are ever asked of Dennis. For many, that's all it takes for them to opt for another purchase option. Is it remote ? Pretty much. About as remote as something that will occur 1-2% of the time. It does happen, and thus the possible exception to make a change to a thread title that has zero, and "zero" has been proven, to something less impugning, as has been suggested. If this thread title does not meet the requirement for one that needs to be changed, then I can't fathom any situation where one would.

 

[WebSlave]

All that may be well and good Rich, but your example of Matt having self-inflicted wounds here for all to see require that a viewer of the BOI actually read a few posts. In the meantime, the real possibility also exists that a casual browser of the BOI front page may have interest in reading other threads, and pass over this thread with only a glance at the header, as they never heard of either party, and do not anticipate doing business with either. Down the road, they may only recollect the name "Dennis Hultman ... Bad Guy" if they see an ad from Dennis, or are ever asked of Dennis. For many, that's all it takes for them to opt for another purchase option. Is it remote ? Pretty much. About as remote as something that will occur 1-2% of the time. It does happen, and thus the possible exception to make a change to a thread title that has zero, and "zero" has been proven, to something less impugning, as has been suggested. If this thread title does not meet the requirement for one that needs to be changed, then I can't fathom any situation where one would.

Jim, when you get the time, check into the legal liabilities involved for someone editing a post or thread in situations where litigation between the parties may be possible. In a nutshell, if I edit a thread or post, I then become co-author to it in it's entirety. Thanks, but no thanks. I don't mind being responsible for my own words, but I certainly am not interested in being responsible for someone else's.

On Good Guy posts where there is a misspelling of the person's name, I will often edit it upon request. But even they can be risky if they take a nasty turn along the way. But Bad Guy threads right off the bat? Nope.

Simply put, it is up to the poster to make certain of what they post here. You are pretty much carving it in stone..........

 

[liquidleaf]

This isn't a christian board and I think it is unfair to use someones religion against them on this board, even if they are not a shining example of their religion.

Sorry if I offended you, FunkyRes - but as pointed out, Matt makes a point of declaring what a good Christian he is at every turn. I personally believe religion is a completely private thing. I don't share my religious beliefs online for any reason, but Matt has done so many times to show what a "good" person he is.

My point was to show that Matt is not displaying those same qualities he has said in the past he holds in such high regard and talked about so much right here on this forum.

 

[DThomas]

All that may be well and good Rich, but your example of Matt having self-inflicted wounds here for all to see require that a viewer of the BOI actually read a few posts. In the meantime, the real possibility also exists that a casual browser of the BOI front page may have interest in reading other threads, and pass over this thread with only a glance at the header, as they never heard of either party, and do not anticipate doing business with either. Down the road, they may only recollect the name "Dennis Hultman ... Bad Guy" if they see an ad from Dennis, or are ever asked of Dennis. For many, that's all it takes for them to opt for another purchase option. Is it remote ? Pretty much. About as remote as something that will occur 1-2% of the time. It does happen, and thus the possible exception to make a change to a thread title that has zero, and "zero" has been proven, to something less impugning, as has been suggested. If this thread title does not meet the requirement for one that needs to be changed, then I can't fathom any situation where one would.

We won't change this one for the same reason we don't change any others. We then become co-authors of the thread. If your senario were to come true, quite likely it would give Dennis H grounds for a cause of action against Matt. Now if we changed the thread title to "something less impugning," what do you think that would do to any recourse Dennis H. might have. It would seriously damage any credibility that the thread is in it's true and correct format as Matt posted it. A good attorney would would say we edited the entire thing to make Matt look bad. Additionally Matt could argue that it's not that bad, after it was changed to "something less impugning."

I can only think of one time a thread title was edited to fix a spelling mistake and we were told point blank by Rich not to do it again. That is why you see threads locked and the poster told to start a new thread when they leave someone's name out of the title.

You never, ever mess with, change, or alter potential evidence. That is how I view the BOI and considering the nature of it, most people would be well advised to look at it that way also. What you post here could very well end up being used against you in court.

 

[dfherrera]

I appreciate everyones feedback but I was more speaking to the fact that the title is very misleading and derogatory towards Dennis (insert anyone else this has/will happen to) and his business. Matt (again - insert anyone else doing this) has made his bed and must deal with it (or not). That is not what concerns me, I am more concerned with the impact to Dennis' business in that the title appears negative. That is why I would want to have someone (moderators only) have the direction to be able to change the title. Not delete the post but ensure the title reflects the direction the thread has taken. Either that or moving it to an area off the BOI that will not further harm his business (if it has).

I like this forum and look at it often even though I do not post often. I think it serves its purpose in alerting the public to possible things to watch out for in future transactions. The difference is I have read through this and the other posts so I have an idea on the content. Others might simply do a search and be turned off by the title and never reach out to Dennis for the "facts".

Anyway - as someone posted, I would also order from Dennis should I see something he has that I want.

Thanks again.

 

[dfherrera]

Understood

Dennis T - Sorry I posted the previous one just prior to seeing your response. It makes sense and I understand what you are saying.

Thanks

 

[Chameleon Company]

Dennis T.,
While I cannot disagree with all the fundamental arguments of your position, I can most certainly disagree with its practicality.

1) If this were GM and Ford, we'd have to be much more concerned about all underlying civil concerns. Regardless of who Dennis H. is, Matt is a turnip.

2) While my example of a potential loss of business for Dennis is remote, it is possible as stated. That it would happen and that Dennis H. would also know that it happenned, obtain actionable civil claims, and then pursue them against Matt, requires so many other things to fall in place, is a scenario beyond imagination.

3) Its all moot as the administration is most capable of rewriting the header, and taking credit as the new author, something like "Dennis Hultman ... mistaken identity" posted by Fauna Administration, etc. Then, you create a first post which contains the original header and author, dates, etc, and a one sentence explanation that would entail no liabilities from the thread starter. Matt would still retain ownership. This would further deter repetitions of this kind of misuse of the BOI.

Maybe its more trouble than it is worth to Administration. OK. I would point out that as with many actions taken by Administration anywhere, its not just to correct the mistake or problem, but to display to all members/employees that you maintain a standard.

 

[DThomas]

2) While my example of a potential loss of business for Dennis is remote, it is possible as stated. That it would happen and that Dennis H. would also know that it happenned, obtain actionable civil claims, and then pursue them against Matt, requires so many other things to fall in place, is a scenario beyond imagination.

However remote the possibility is, it is still there.

3) Its all moot as the administration is most capable of rewriting the header, and taking credit as the new author, something like "Dennis Hultman ... mistaken identity" posted by Fauna Administration, etc. Then, you create a first post which contains the original header and author, dates, etc, and a one sentence explanation that would entail no liabilities from the thread starter. Matt would still retain ownership. This would further deter repetitions of this kind of misuse of the BOI.

The point is it would still be changed and not in it's original form. An attorney would jump all over that. Most likely it would become the main focus of any proceeding if for only to take the focus off of the original reason. I have lost count the amount of times I have been in a court room, on the stand, and getting absolutely grilled over something insignificant. This is in both criminal and civil court. It would happen in a case like this, I guarantee it. And no, I am not willing to go through something like that because I edited a thread.

Maybe its more trouble than it is worth to Administration. OK. I would point out that as with many actions taken by Administration anywhere, its not just to correct the mistake or problem, but to display to all members/employees that you maintain a standard.

The potential for trouble is not worth it. We are displaying a standard. We do not edit BOI posts, period. You own what you write so be darn certain it's what you want the world to see because it WILL be here forever. As Rich said, we will not rescue someone from themselves.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Dennis T.,
We appear to be on a track to agree to disagree at best.

The point is it would still be changed and not in it's original form. An attorney would jump all over that. Most likely it would become the main focus of any proceeding if for only to take the focus off of the original reason. I have lost count the amount of times I have been in a court room, on the stand, and getting absolutely grilled over something insignificant. This is in both criminal and civil court. It would happen in a case like this, I guarantee it. And no, I am not willing to go through something like that because I edited a thread.

All of the original thread would still be here. That would include all of Matt's original post. If Dennis H. had an actionable claim, it would be just as actionable. I also have much experience with civil law, from every angle. Lots. Beaucoup. Such corrections in publications, retractions in the form of printed material, and deletions etc on the internet occur all of the time. By corporations with much more at risk than Fauna. They are able to do it and still maintain all evidence. No brainer.

As Rich said, we will not rescue someone from themselves.

This would not rescue Matt. He'd still be flapping in the wind just as he is now. It might help with the integrity of a few other entities though.

 

[DThomas]

Dennis T.,
We appear to be on a track to agree to disagree at best.

I'll agree with you on that.

All of the original thread would still be here. That would include all of Matt's original post. If Dennis H. had an actionable claim, it would be just as actionable. I also have much experience with civil law, from every angle. Lots. Beaucoup. Such corrections in publications, retractions in the form of printed material, and deletions etc on the internet occur all of the time. By corporations with much more at risk than Fauna. They are able to do it and still maintain all evidence. No brainer.



This would not rescue Matt. He'd still be flapping in the wind just as he is now. It might help with the integrity of a few other entities though.

It really just boils down to that Rich, the other MODs, and I have no desire to be potentially dragged into court in the middle of someone else's pissing match. I'm not going to be the one explaining why a thread was edited.

 

[Chameleon Company]

Dennis T.
In the most unlikely chance that this ever becomes actionable, which is the basis for your objection, you are just as likely in court either way.

The request is to put up a new BOI header. The current BOI header was not specifically posted there by Matt, but rather the programming here. The original Post #1, with its original "Title" line, exactly as typed by Matt, which your programming then makes into the thread title, would still exist in its complete and unchanged original form, just like this:

Dennis Hultman dabbles in more than reptiles BAD GUY

Name Dennis J. Hultman
Location: Apache Junction, AZ
License Number BR009194000
Summary Conducted sales activities without an active license.
Order Date September 20, 2006
Action $2,000 Civil Penalty

Lets know know who your dealing with.. SCUM!!
__________________
www.MGReptiles.com
Choice Reptile Heating Supplies

Mention the BOI and receive 5% off..

I agree that there are scenarios in the past where patrons have requested Rich intervene. Sometimes it is not prudent. But if your argument has merit, which requires that some injury to Matt occur that reaches a threshold to make it worth his while, then Fauna may just as likely be in the crosshairs for not having made an adjustment to the net result of the programming in this instance, as in Fauna, Co-defendent. I will also bet you a dollar to a donut that the other defense attorney makes the argument first

 

[Dragondad]

At this I would have to disagree, Fauna didn't create the title of the thread. Matt typed that all by his own little fingers. And since Matt has started over 115 threads on this board he can't claim that he didn't know his first line was also the title.

So we have a guy who's intent is to damage a member, who types and creates the starting thread knowing how the system works. And probably knowing that the information is correct. I don't see Fauna being liable in anything.

 

[Dragondad]

make that.

...information is incorrect.

 

[Chameleon Company]

DragonDad,

And since Matt has started over 115 threads on this board he can't claim that he didn't know his first line was also the title.

No one alleged this, so I'm not sure where your disagreement lies. While this is all just hypothetical, the point is that if Dennis H. had a claim against Matt G. due to events here, specifically damage done to Dennis by the thead title's existence, then Matt's defense could claim that Fauna took no action to mitigate the potential for damage, and is therefore culpable for damage as well. In the highly unlikely event that such a case would be brought, its a good defense for Matt to duck some of the damages.

 

[Dragondad]

Well, I understand that part. And I will admit my experience gives me no basis to go from. So I can see the logic of your thoughts.

 

[Chameleon Company]

I think all about the disagreement to make the change goes to either of two things, namely does it:

1) Change the evidence of Matt's actions, and/or

2) Increase Fauna's liability.

My point is "No" to #1, and that it would actually mitigate (lessen) Fauna's liability in #2.

Obviously, Dennis H. is not too worried about such. Hi Dennis . But another couple of members here did raise the issue, and usually its because they don't ever want to see their name trashed in a similar fashion. I have had my name included in a Bad Guy thread as well where I was not a party to the claimed infamy within. While not as blatant as in this thread, nor am I a disinterested third party with no dog in this hunt.

 

[Dennis Hultman]

While I appreciate everyone’s statements, I would still have treated this complaint as invalid even if it were I. There is a difference if someone was scamming someone and one started a thread about the person. From what I gather, from what was posted, that this person had a civil fine imposed on them. It would still have no place here.

Should a persons bankruptcy be posted? It’s a civil matter. To start a thread out of the blue that “John Doe” filled a bankruptcy. Would that be acceptable? My opinion would be no.

Matt didn’t post because he had a bad transaction with me. I didn’t have a bad transaction with someone else. It was started because he hasn’t liked my comments about how he has treated his recent customers and others.

The thread is going to stay. Since this has absolutely nothing to with a transaction, I would just rather like to see this one sink to the bottom. Unless, someone has or had a bad transaction with me then I would definity encourage you to post or contact me directly to resolve it.

There is a perfectly good feedback forum to discuss the reasons why a thread should be started, locked or moved.

 

[Chameleon Company]

A valid argument regrding this thread not meeting the BOI requirements, and I remember you making the point. It would seem then that the Mod's had good reason to lock it early on, which would be to tie a rock to it and compel it to sink. That's two valid opportunities missed to address this error. As the mod's chose to take up the gauntlet here, unfortunately it was where the debate was to be had. To Davey Jones' locker then !