** BST Warning - Brandon Brown **

[shammus]

Unfortunately we've recently had to revisit an issue that has come up several times in the past concerning Brandon Brown making good on deals he agrees to in our BST section. None of the moderators, myself included, enjoy having to call people out on the main board. This case is certainly no exception especially given that we feel Brandon has good intentions at least when he first agrees to a transaction. However, it's been brought to our attention, that even with several warnings and a couple of prior bannings/reinstatements, deals are still continuing to go sour on Brandon's end. We've decided to go ahead and ban/remove Brandon from the BST section at this point, however he will still be allowed to participate on the main board.

This is not in any way a personal attack on Brandon and we're certainly not trying to pick on him. Part of what we try to do as moderators is communicate to the public when things aren't working right in a particular situation. So this will hopefully serve as a heads up for any deals that might already be in the works or underway in the near future.

Regards,
Brian

[V117collector]

Maybe it would be a good idea to put this issue to a community vote before banning a member. Let’s get all the facts from all parties before making any rush decisions…

[shammus]

Why post? Heh, well, how else would we let the community know we were banning him?

In all seriousness, like I said above, this sort of a post serves as a headsup to those already dealing with him as well as those that might in the near future. When members of the community aren't upholding their end of the bargain, others have a right to know about it so they can react accordingly.

Edited to say...Actually, we have brought this up publically before. Like I said...not the first time.

[calvindog]

Are there any accountants on board to compile the vote totals?

Will speeches for and against banning be made prior to the vote?

Will Robert's Rules of Parliamentary Procedure be utilized?

I have never had a problem with him coming through on a deal. Just closed another for the 3rd time with him today. He was short on $ so he asked about cards for a trade and we agreed to a $ and a few cards. Not even close to the guy I just got a stiff one from.

[jabiloxi]

I think he is a good guy, I have had deals with him that have gone well, and also had some that fell through. I still feel he is a good member that may get ahead of himself a bit and in this hobby and in this economy that is pretty easy to do. But I had no idea that others were having problems, and that definitely would have been appreciated information.

Anyways, I am sure that the moderators are doing what is in the best interest of the board and for the legitimacy of the BST. Maybe in the future we should look to set up some sort of visual deal tracker, where both parties agree to a deal and post it publicly on the Forum somewhere. That way it would be easier for us to keep an eye on.

[David Atkatz]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Are there any accountants on board to compile the vote totals?

Will speeches for and against banning be made prior to the vote?

Will Robert's Rules of Parliamentary Procedure be utilized?

What Brandon needs is...

...a good defense attorney!

[V117collector]

Originally Posted by shammus

Why post? Heh, well, how else would we let the community know we were banning him?

In all seriousness, like I said above, this sort of a post serves as a headsup to those already dealing with him as well as those that might in the near future. When members of the community aren't upholding their end of the bargain, others have a right to know about it so they can react accordingly.

Edited to say...Actually, we have brought this up publically before. Like I said...not the first time.

Brain, please don’t take my posts personal!!! As a board member I find this topic interesting as too what transpired. I would like to learn more about these incidents or any other banning. More info is needed--> was there any money lost?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by V117collector

Maybe it would be a good idea to put this issue to a community vote before banning a member.

That would be a logistical nightmare.

[Bamacollection]

I had one deal with Brandon that was extremely slow and involved several excuses, but in the end he finally made the deal good.

[Reginald Marsh]

I have bought and sold Brandon cards and never had any problems.....GASP-are you serious a moderator wants to ban someone........Noooooooo- it can't be.

I hope when it goes to vote that there is no paper chad problems.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Bamacollection

I had one deal with Brandon that was extremely slow and involved several excuses, but in the end he finally made the deal good.

Same for me (I think we did just 1 deal together with a few cards involved). I note as well that he came off as a nice guy, and I am sure he is. But the B/S/T needs willing and able sellers and willing and able buyers . . . timely receipt of payments and timely receipt of items is critical.

[botn]

Hmmm...So is Brandon a great guy or what?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Greg only auction house executives are great guys.

[Reginald Marsh]

I think Brandon lives from deal to deal and sometimes bites off more than he can chew but to ban him i think is unjust. Just like on E-bay there are slow payers and shippers and they do not get booted off.

If he buys a card from me and then cannot pay for it i'm not going to freak out about it, i would just re offer the card and move on and not accept anymore of his offers.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Reginald Marsh

Just like on E-bay there are slow payers and shippers and they do not get booted off.

I hope we never use eBay's policies as our measuring stick for how to run a successful operation.

[botn]

Peter,

Are you certain? I thought a great guy can be anyone who sells (not limited to auction house execs) as well as people who have owned two Wagners? Maybe Jeff L can pipe in on this and clarify it.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Fair enough, owning two Wagners makes you a good guy, and lying about it makes you a great guy.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by V117collector

Maybe it would be a good idea to put this issue to a community vote before banning a member. Let’s get all the facts from all parties before making any rush decisions…

We did put this issue to a vote in a community. The community was 4 moderators and it was immediately, easily unanimous, with the information we have, to not let him participate on the B/S/T pages indefinitely. It's for the well being of the whole community. Brandon is still welcome to participate and be a part of the main forum if he chooses to.
None of us moderators enjoy this part of the gig....regards

[shammus]

Brad - no worries at all! To give you a little backstory, we sincerely believe Brandon is a good guy. He's never stolen any cards or money, he's pretty much guilty of just one thing - committing to deals and then never sending payment and oftentimes, not communicating a reason why. In addition to other things, this drags a transaction out weeks if not months all the while the seller is wondering if he's ever going to see the money. Not a good thing to have on our board.

Reginald - your assessment of Ebay is not exactly accurate. Slow payers and shippers (especially those that never send payment or communicate why) receive negative feedback. Eventually, if you get enough of those and have enough people complaining about you, you get booted off. That's what happened here. This is not a one-time infraction that we're booting him off for. It's happened many times over the course of the past year or so. He's had plenty of warnings, chances to make good, banishments and then reinstatements and on and on. And still, we have the same issues and people writing us with their complaints. I think at one point, or maybe a few points, we did discuss this very situation on the board to determine a course of action. At some point, we have to go to the next step for the good of the community as a whole, and this, unfortunately is the next step.

[Jacklitsch]

I'm not real sure why it was necessary to "out" Brandon in this manner.

Might it just have been better to ban his use of the BST and leave it at that.

[daviddbreadman]

I like the idea someone generated earlier, perhaps a "feedback" board where each member has his name in a thread that deal makers can post on. I realize there are a lot of members here and first thought its that it would be a large amount of data but it seems many of the same names on the B/S/T.

Has anyone ever thought to ask Brandon why he has a hard time paying immediatly or in a timely fashion?????? I have not seen one person who has mentioned this reason. Does anyone know other than me???? I will not disclose his personal life but I think someone should ask him.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by botn

Peter,

Are you certain? I thought a great guy can be anyone who sells (not limited to auction house execs) as well as people who have owned two Wagners? Maybe Jeff L can pipe in on this and clarify it.

You can become a 'great' guy not just by lying on the board or committing massive fraud. You can also become a 'great' guy by describing other crooks as 'great' guys. Or even just because you love Mickey Cochrane uniforms so much (even if they're not really his uniforms). Or sometimes you can be a 'great' guy just for any combination of the factors I just described.

[Browncow75]

Hey Guys,
To those I have let down on deals - I sincerely appologise for lack of communication or completion on my end. No excuses...I screwed up, and as far as the BST "ban" I completely understand, and to an extent, agree with it. To the moderaters - Thanks for the previous opportunities on the BST. I know you have a tough job protecting the best interests of the members who depend on the BST as a primary outlet for their vintage collecting needs. No hard feelings on my end. To those of you who I have had (multiple) successful transactions with - thank you and I hope you continue to have luck in your collecting "careers". All in all, it has been a very interesting and rewarding experience as a member of the board. That said, there are very few points of interest outside the BST for me, so I will be a rare visitor to other portions of the site that I still have access to. Nothing personal towards anyone, just not that much that pertains to my collecting interests happens enough on the main board. As Ive noticed quite a bit, Alot of "political" bickering and not enough vintage card discussion for my taste. Well, thats the news, and I....am....outta here!

Brandon B

[chris6net]

I feel for both sides but in the end Leon and his group have made the right decision. Brandon is probably a great guy but the BST board does need any complaints as we are a small community. Maybe after a few months the ban might be lifted but if I was posting on the BST I would hope for no problems. Thanks Leon and crew for all your work. CN

[cyseymour]

Considering that he never stole anything, the ban seems a bit draconian. Maybe a one-year suspension or something like that would be more reasonable. Also, I don't see why he should be called out in this manner since he never stole anything - it's not like people needed to know this information in order to protect themselves.

[Reginald Marsh]

I love the word "draconian"

[zork1974]

At least Brandon apologized and thanked everyone for their business. However, I'll pose this question. How many people are using this board as a sales tool only? To use the BST and state that "there are very few points of interest outside the BST for me" makes me wonder...

[Matt]

Originally Posted by zork1974

At least Brandon apologized and thanked everyone for their business. However, I'll pose this question. How many people are using this board as a sales tool only? To use the BST and state that "there are very few points of interest outside the BST for me" makes me wonder...

I think the number who only use the BST is only surpassed by the number who only come on the main forum to ask a question about what they have only so that they can then, in turn, sell it on the BST.

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

Considering that he never stole anything, the ban seems a bit draconian. Maybe a one-year suspension or something like that would be more reasonable. Also, I don't see why he should be called out in this manner since he never stole anything - it's not like people needed to know this information in order to protect themselves.

First of all thanks to Brandon for being a man about this. This says a hell of a lot to me (and it's all good). He's not a bad guy but just gets in over his head on transactions. He knows it. It's not like there aren't a thousand more card addicts (definitely me included) on this site BUT we usually don't make deals we can't follow through with OR take way too long. Brandon did have a few month ban previously, before this one, and I am all for giving him another chance in the future.....say 6 mos. to a year. He has never committed fraud or stolen anything so there is/was no serious harm ever done. I would think of this more as a cooling off period....We (the moderators) will continue to what we feel is in the best interest of our community. I think everyone knows all of the moderators (4 of us) so know that it's not like any of us are going to be a push over or do something we don't feel is right, regardless of the other mods on the team. If this had gone to our vote and one of us had a huge issue then I am sure we would have thought it through some more. In the end it was the right decision and Brandon is welcome on the main board...and in time probably back on the BST..Our community also has a way of self policing itself. Had we made a huge mistake I am sure it would have been made known. best regards

ps...as far as using the board as a sales tool only, there is no rule against that, as long as everyone plays nicely. I have to get involved (I don't like to) in approx. less than 5 transactions per yr, so I would say that is pretty good.

[shammus]

"....it's not like people needed to know this information in order to protect themselves..."


I think you missed the point. This reason is exactly why we post on the board about things like this. Also, I don't think we've ever banned anyone permanently. Even when we've banned Brandon in the past, we've always let him back on in a few weeks or so.

Brandon, I do appreciate you coming on and giving your take. Hope there are no hard feelings and that we see you on the board again from time to time.

[Browncow75]

Hey Guys,
Just wanted to post again and say, that indeed I have no hard feelings or harbor ill will toward anyone on the board, be it moderators or other members. I completely understand the reason for the moderators decision and respect the job they do, and have done. As Leon and Brian have stated, I have hope that once I am able to get myself in a better position personally, I will be allowed to be a part of the BST section again at some point. I will occasionally check with them to let them know of my progress in improving my abilty to be a reliable and productive member of the site in the BST forum. Not to get into detail, but it does have alot to do with my financial situation, and my "overwillingness" to spread myself to thin at times. I understand that I may not be able to be up there with the "big timers" when it comes to my collection, but I still seem to over do it at times. I guess it is a and "addiction" of sorts that I need to work on. Im not making excuses, just hopefully discovering a little about my personality that I need to work on! I dont drink or do drugs, so maybe this is my "vice". Well I will leave it at that, and contrary to the way it came out, I do find information on the site helpful, I just meant that my current collecting interests are very specific, and I dont really see much relevant subject matter come up that often. I didnt mean it the way it sounded. Thanks again to those who spoke up in support of me, and also to those who I have let down, thanks for your personal and professional courtesy to not site specific details on the main board regarding our deals. Lastly, as I stated, I have no ill weill toward any of the moderators, but everyone else seemed to weigh in with their position on whether to post or "out" someone who has been banned, on the main page. I dont really think its necessary, because if individuals contact the mods about a particular issue with another member, it should stay between them (the compalintant) and the mods. If the person is to be banned, only the people who are involved should be notified. Posting a thread in this manner may only stand to "villify" the banned person to people who otherwise wouldnt have had any idea there was an issue, especially considering that the banned person wouldnt be there to do anymore damage. Just my 2 cents on the issue. Thanks all!

Brandon B

[cyseymour]

[QUOTE=shammus;742110]"....it's not like people needed to know this information in order to protect themselves..."


I think you missed the point. This reason is exactly why we post on the board about things like this. Also, I don't think we've ever banned anyone permanently. Even when we've banned%2

[cyseymour]

Brandon,

Don't worry, I wouldn't get too bent out of shape about some guy named after a whale who's got a bunch of old cardboard shoved so far up his behind that he's got nothing better to do than call out some broke guy to a board of 2,000 people for failing to make a few transactions. Well, brutha, I would sell to you but not the whale and if you change your mind and decide not to buy the card, that is fine, too. Take it easy, brutha...

Cy

[cyseymour]

......................

[Reginald Marsh]

Let's get ready to Rrrrruuuuummmmbbblllllleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...... ..

[barrysloate]

Jamie- Shammus is Brian McQueen. He's not hiding behind a moniker. And he's a good friend. Could we have a little more constructive dialogue here? Thank you.

[Jim VB]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

By the way Shamu,

Considering you don't use your full name and hide behind a moniker, not even revealing your first name, what if Brandon's employers or prospective employers see your sleazy post and it causes him even more damage? Over a baseball card? That he didn't even steal? I just think it is spineless considering that you, yourself hide completely - it is pretty audacious then to use other people's full names on the board and then call them out for their misgivings. Where is the responsibility in that? I mean, your profile has nothing - no pictures, no cards, no name - NOTHING, man, NOTHING. But here you are calling out other people - it's pretty disgraceful to me.

Cy

Jamie,

Brian is also one of the board's moderators. If the moderators determine (and this wasn't Brian by himself) that someone should not be participating in the BST, I'm OK with that.

[jmk59]

Hi Jamie,

I think you stuck your foot in it a little bit in this case because Brian is a moderator, and you do owe him an apology. However, I think most of your points are very valid in the too-many cases here in which individuals call out other individuals over single transactions and even perceived slights.

So board ... I know it will be easy to outright dismiss Jamie's thinking on this because he mistakenly applied it to a moderator, but he makes some very good points on board call-outs in general. Some people are way too fast and loose with wanting to call the local hangman for reasons that are sometimes way too thin.

These are people's reputations that are in play here. It should take something certain and clearly grievous before someone gets to start tossing someone else's name out there and accusing him of dishonest dealings.

J

[cyseymour]

It was late last night and I probably could have done a better job expressing my point, but there are 2,000 people on this board, and I doubt that the majority of them know who Brian McQueen is, have ever met him, or understand that it is him posting under the name "Shammus". Certainly, Brandon Brown's potential employers wouldn't if they were to do a Google check on him.

Just because someone changed their mind on a baseball card deal, doesn't mean they should be called out to, if you think about it, not only the board here, but really anyone on the planet who does a search on their name. The punishment does not fit the crime. I can understand the point of outting someone who was stealing cards; that is breaking the law. But to "out" someone who agreed to a few deals that were not legally binding, just because they ran out of funds, to me is a lot more unethical than the original misdoings.

I'm really just trying to bring light to that point. Personally, I think this whole thread should be deleted. As for suspending him from the B/S/T, I have no problem with that. Frankly, I believe that "suspension" is a much more appropriate word than "ban", especially if you plan on re-instating him in six months or a year. "Ban" really has a much more violent connotation.

To summarize, if you post defamatory information about someone online, using their full name, then it is only ethical to disclose yours, as opposed to hiding behind the moniker "shammus". But to do that, especially considering that the person's misdoing was not even illegal, they just ran out of funds, meaning that their refusal to buy the cards was borne out of fiscal responsibility, is like the modern-day equivalent of a tar-and-feathering. Brandon Brown's last post says as much, and as I said before, I do not want to complain on here without offering a solution; that the whole thread should be deleted.

[cyseymour]

I'd also like to propose that if anyone chooses to out someone in the future, for any reason, the person doing the outing should provide, at the least, their full name and contact information (at the very least, an email address). I think that would be very good policy for the board.

[barrysloate]

Because Brian has been a moderator for so many years, he probably assumed that everyone knew who he was. Hopefully he'll come on this thread later and comment.

[Rich Klein]

Brian's email took me about three minutes to find on this site. I don't think he is hiding from anyone. redmaccie@hotmail.com is his email.

Brandon has come on the board and supported the ban on himself and realizes he means well but makes mistakes (as we all do)

At this point; this should be a non-issue for all concerned

Regards
Rich

[kcohen]

To summarize, if you post defamatory information about someone online....

I have re-read the initial post and see nothing defamatory.

Ken

[Leon]

Originally Posted by cyseymour

It was late last night and I probably could have done a better job expressing my point, but there are 2,000 people on this board, and I doubt that the majority of them know who Brian McQueen is, have ever met him, or understand that it is him posting under the name "Shammus". Certainly, Brandon Brown's potential employers wouldn't if they were to do a Google check on him.

Just because someone changed their mind on a baseball card deal, doesn't mean they should be called out to, if you think about it, not only the board here, but really anyone on the planet who does a search on their name. The punishment does not fit the crime. I can understand the point of outting someone who was stealing cards; that is breaking the law. But to "out" someone who agreed to a few deals that were not legally binding, just because they ran out of funds, to me is a lot more unethical than the original misdoings.

I'm really just trying to bring light to that point. Personally, I think this whole thread should be deleted. As for suspending him from the B/S/T, I have no problem with that. Frankly, I believe that "suspension" is a much more appropriate word than "ban", especially if you plan on re-instating him in six months or a year. "Ban" really has a much more violent connotation.

To summarize, if you post defamatory information about someone online, using their full name, then it is only ethical to disclose yours, as opposed to hiding behind the moniker "shammus". But to do that, especially considering that the person's misdoing was not even illegal, they just ran out of funds, meaning that their refusal to buy the cards was borne out of fiscal responsibility, is like the modern-day equivalent of a tar-and-feathering. Brandon Brown's last post says as much, and as I said before, I do not want to complain on here without offering a solution; that the whole thread should be deleted.

Hi Cy
We (the moderators and I (I am Leon Luckey) appreciate your constructive criticism and will take it that way. I have to be on the road in a few minutes and might only get on the computer a few times over the next few days. I just don't want you to think I am making a post and running away. Check out the number of posts I have made compared to everyone elses, except the "archive" ones, and you will see I post a fair amount and don't post and run. I will start at the top and try to help my good friend Brian out. These are just my opinions and unfortunately I can't be back on a computer until at best, late tonight. So here goes. I will answer your concerns in the order you gave them.......

1. Actually I bet it is pretty close to 51% or more that know who Brian is. I am sure if we do a poll it will say so. He is well known and well liked, and has been for many years on this board. As long as Brian didn't tell an untruth I really have no issue with he (anyone) talking about what happens on the BST pages. My guess is most others won't either. I could be wrong.

2. You are right. Just because someone changes their mind on a deal they shouldn't be called out for it. If someone changes their mind, or is really really slow on many deals, in our opinion, they should be called out for it, as a courtesy to other participants. More often than not, historically speaking, when this happens and we have gotten to that point to make it known, several other members come forward with similar stories but weren't saying anything. Again, if they had known about the many other members this happened to, then they might have come out and said something beforehand. If the only punishment is having their dealings be known, it seems rather fair, if not lenient, to us. Again, maybe I/we are wrong.
Deals that are made on the BST are legallly binding. Trust me on this. I am no lawyer (and I am sure I will be corrected if I am wrong) but if you make an oral contract with someone, and have the legal right to make that contract, then you can be held to it. It's extremely rare, I would guess, on chatboards like this, but I have a pretty good idea it could happen. I know positively that you are legally liable for what you say on the internet. And for the record, us moderators aren't legally liable for what anyone else says. So if we out someone that makes many deals, and has big issues with following them through, then we are worse for exposing them? I am not positive I can agree with that.

3. We don't delete threads except in extraordinary cases. In my opinion this isn't close to that. There have probably been 3 or less threads deleted in the last 3-4 yrs, other than for operational purposes. We just don't usually do it. Again, these are legally binding deals if someone cares to prove it. I am pretty darn sure it can be taken to court and you can be held liable, someway. Again, maybe I am wrong? And we are wrong for exposing their mistakes?

4. As mentioned above I believe more people than not know Brian and he is well liked by everyone I have ever spoken with, which is quite a few folks. You keep getting on the illegal thing....but I have a funny feeling the law might see it differently. Maybe a lawyer will chime in? I understand there might not be much punishment but I do think some form of law is being broken...just not one that is acted on very often. You say that someone made a deal, ran out of money, and is responsible? I fail to see the logic in that. Of course they didn't do the last deal but it wasn't because of responsibility, it was because of irresponsibibility. A modern day tar and feathering? I beg to differ...by the responses above I think the situation was summarized fairly. I could be wrong. As long as there is nothing extraoridinary in this thread, and it's not even close imo so far, then it won't be deleted. It's sort of a policy not to, except in one of those extraordinary circumstances.

Thanks again for your feedback. It is greatly appreciated. All opinions are good ones. The one thing I got out of college is that many times I am in the minority in my way of thinking, even when I could have swore I was in the majority. I hope this gives you a few of my, and our, feelings (though the other mods can disagree if they choose to) concerns.
best regards
leon luckey

[docpatlv]

A suggestion...

If you are going to "call someone out" on this board, then you could just type their name with no space between......BrandonBrown. That way anyone doing a search will probably not pull up info from this site, but members who may need to be informed on this board will still know who you're talking about.

[cyseymour]

Leon,

Thanks for your reply, and I understand you are going on vacation, but my response is that what you define as an oral contract, whether true or untrue, is unenforcable by law. If I agreed to buy a card from you, and I reneged on the deal, and you took me to court, you would have an incredibly hard time winning. You would have to prove fiscal damage created by my reneging on the deal, which would be incredibly hard to do considering that you still own the card. Reneging on an oral contract almost never holds up in civil court, if it makes it that far, and it is far different than a criminal offense such as stealing someone's property or internet scamming someone.

I also think that I can make an argument that all these threads nitpicking about annoying buyers actually adds too many names into the mix and distracts folks from focusing on the people who really HAVE stolen money or cards - those who are the real threat on the boards.

If you are going to use Net54 as a buying/selling arena, complete with a disciplinary process, then that process should be clearly stated so that participants understand the potential consequences of their actions ahead of time.

Also, where you get the 51% number who know Brian, I would really doubt that. There are 2000 members of this board, meaning that you are assuming that over 1000 people know who "Shammus" is when he posts. That would be pretty extraordinary. I am guessing that the number is closer to ten or fifteen percent. A poll would not be an accurate test because all his friends who read this thread would come rushing to his defense, and also because the people who populate the boards most frequently are most likely to know him.

Questions remain:

Did Brandon Brown know that he would be outed if he once again reneged on card deals?

Why are there not policies stating what happens in the case of stealing cards or money - or regarding how annoying behavior like reneging is dealt with?

You are dealing with some major privacy issues when outing someone like that, for minor offenses, as irritable as they may be. I hardly think that I am alone in my belief that people should be suspended or banned, but not outed, for repeated minor offenses. It should be reserved for people who are scamming or stealing. Otherwise, any disagreement could become a witch-hunt where the two parties race for the boards to get their thread in slandering the opposing party.

For the record, I have never bought nor sold anything on the B/S/T, nor plan to... eBay is looking more and more appealing every moment...

[shammus]

I find it humorous that someone who comes on the board all worked up about the use of “defamatory information”, does so in a manner which is, uh, well defamatory. That little hypocrisy removed any credibility that Jamie’s argument might have had in my opinion. In fact, I sort of found it childish. “Shamu, the whale”…really? That is the best you can do? I suppose I can live with being referred to as a “d**k” although referring to me as a fat, old guy is, while mildly humorous, a little inaccurate to say the least. Jeez…do some research next time, please.

I will say though that personal attacks are not allowed on the board and this is in the rules. The same can be said for profanity. You might want to take a gander at those before posting any further. Also, do consider this the one and only warning I will give you. Any more personal attacks out of you and you will have your own suspension/banishment to deal with so you won’t have to worry about Brandon’s so much.

As far as who I am…wow, this was another childish argument and one I won’t spend too much time covering. I’ve been a moderator for years, like Leon mentioned. I’ve met many in person at the National, been involved in numerous hobby-related projects outside the board, built websites for several board members and had hundreds upon hundreds of successful transactions on both Ebay and the board using my moniker of Shammus. In addition, I can also legitimately say that I designed the board as it is now and I along with a couple others built it. So, in other words, the pages that you visit and enjoy on this board were put together by yours truly. In this argument, your posts were especially ignorant and immature. The fact that a number of my friends have come to my defense already should tell you something. The next time you feel that you have a point to make, I would suggest you actually put in some research to back your point up so that you don’t come off so foolish looking.

As far as Brandon is concerned, I’ve already made note several times that I’m sorry to see him go. We don’t like having to reprimand people. Like Leon and I have previously stated, this wasn’t a one-time thing and has happened many times with us intervening many times. At this point, with all the complaints we had received, we had no choice but to take the next level. Why post about it on a public forum? Simple. This is not Ebay. We don’t have a feedback system and we don’t have a “blacklist” where we can list all the people that don’t follow through on transactions. Communicating through threads on the board is how we let all the other members know that all is not right. It is a courtesy that we provide to keep everybody informed. Sorry you don’t like it, but this is our policy and will continue to be so for the benefit of the community at large.

So, this has been a lengthy post to say the least and I’ll cut it off here. At this point, I’m just rehashing the same old stuff over and over anyway. Jamie, I’m sure you’ll feel like replying to this post and you’re free to post with your opinions, however I highly advise you do so in a more constructive manner this time around if you would like to still be a member of this community by day’s end.

[Anthony S.]

Originally Posted by docpatlv

A suggestion...

If you are going to "call someone out" on this board, then you could just type their name with no space between......BrandonBrown. That way anyone doing a search will probably not pull up info from this site, but members who may need to be informed on this board will still know who you're talking about.

I just googled Brandon's name. There's 203,000 listings. I think he'll be okay. Were his name Snord Terwilliger Klackenheimer, maybe not. Coincidentally I also noticed that someone who used to have his entire first and last name under his moniker, removed his last name and replaced it with simply his last initial before engaging in his extended and unwarranted 3 a.m. diatribe against Brian. I wonder if that has anything to do with "google searches."