# Suggestion for restricted DWA classified access



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

I have a suggestion - to access the DWA classifieds, could there be a way to restrict access so that only genuine DWA holders can view/post/reply.
Being a nosy git I would love to see what is being sold but I would rather lose that access and know that only genuine licence holders access this section rather than see timewasters clog up genuine adverts.


----------



## moodyblue1969 (Jul 6, 2009)

ian14 said:


> I have a suggestion - to access the DWA classifieds, could there be a way to restrict access so that only genuine DWA holders can view/post/reply.
> Being a nosy git I would love to see what is being sold but I would rather lose that access and know that only genuine licence holders access this section rather than see timewasters clog up genuine adverts.
> 
> image​


 i kind of agree but allowing us to view only but not post or reply. like you im nosey and this stuff interests me but by restricting who post/reply it might prevent non dwas clogging the section. but i suppose it would be near impossible for the mods to know who has or hasnt got a genuine dwa to grant access or deny access


----------



## wildlifewarrior (Jun 26, 2008)

ian14 said:


> I have a suggestion - to access the DWA classifieds, could there be a way to restrict access so that only genuine DWA holders can view/post/reply.
> Being a nosy git I would love to see what is being sold but I would rather lose that access and know that only genuine licence holders access this section rather than see timewasters clog up genuine adverts.
> image​


you mean like you have to pm T-BO a scanned copy of your paperwork to be granted access or such?

sounds like a good idea to me....seems easier and more genuine than just having a over 18 section as anyone can lie about that


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

The only problem I can see is some people might not be willing to scan their DWA license and thus give a copy of their personal details and home address to a complete stranger, who might be a moderator, but there's no way of saying that mod won't get hacked or someone gain access to a saved image that could potentially be printed off or misused, or personal details abused. Of course I know that the mods are all trustworthy but security with personal data is an issue these days and I think it's a concern some members would have. I personally would not be comfortable uploading a scanned copy of my licenses onto the net and sending them to someone I didn't personally know.


----------



## wildlifewarrior (Jun 26, 2008)

Athravan said:


> The only problem I can see is some people might not be willing to scan their DWA license and thus give a copy of their personal details and home address to a complete stranger, who might be a moderator, but there's no way of saying that mod won't get hacked or someone gain access to a saved image that could potentially be printed off or misused, or personal details abused. Of course I know that the mods are all trustworthy but security with personal data is an issue these days and I think it's a concern some members would have. I personally would not be comfortable uploading a scanned copy of my licenses onto the net and sending them to someone I didn't personally know.


Thats is rather a good point actually, didnt think of that


----------



## ami_j (Jan 6, 2007)

plus what if theres someone with a view to getting DWA? surely people selling DWA animals are checking that the buyers have this license?


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

Athravan said:


> The only problem I can see is some people might not be willing to scan their DWA license and thus give a copy of their personal details and home address to a complete stranger, who might be a moderator, but there's no way of saying that mod won't get hacked or someone gain access to a saved image that could potentially be printed off or misused, or personal details abused. Of course I know that the mods are all trustworthy but security with personal data is an issue these days and I think it's a concern some members would have. I personally would not be comfortable uploading a scanned copy of my licenses onto the net and sending them to someone I didn't personally know.


Yeah I would do that, a mate of mine faxed a copy to someone he thought he was buying a snake off and they in turn tried to use it in a shop to buy a snake.


----------



## paulrimmer69 (Oct 26, 2008)

i dont think that restricting it is the answer personally, the main problem on here seems to be kids/nutjobs who come on and pretend to be someone there not, things have calmed down alot since viperlover was ousted but there are a few others who just seem to enjoy talking c--p and starting arguments, maybe the answer is getting rid of these people as soon as they start or at least a strong warning?


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Ideally RFUK should sign up to the FBH Code of Practice for Internet sales when it finally goes live. However, what would be good idea to start with is including the following:


Vendors of animals scheduled under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act should make all practical enquires to ensure that the purchaser has such a license or is exempt from same.


----------



## Azemiops (May 1, 2008)

ian14 said:


> I have a suggestion - to access the DWA classifieds, could there be a way to restrict access so that only genuine DWA holders can view/post/reply.
> Being a nosy git I would love to see what is being sold but I would rather lose that access and know that only genuine licence holders access this section rather than see timewasters clog up genuine adverts.
> 
> image​


 
Perhaps moderators could simply stay ontop of the advertisments (which, lets face it, there arent going to many!), and delete any posts that have no relevance to the adverts.


----------



## t-bo (Jan 26, 2005)

Chris Newman said:


> Ideally RFUK should sign up to the FBH Code of Practice for Internet sales when it finally goes live. However, what would be good idea to start with is including the following:
> 
> 
> Vendors of animals scheduled under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act should make all practical enquires to ensure that the purchaser has such a license or is exempt from same.


Agreed and i've added that to the forum description.



Azemiops said:


> Perhaps moderators could simply stay ontop of the advertisments (which, lets face it, there arent going to many!), and delete any posts that have no relevance to the adverts.


Agreed again! if members could report any problem posts we will get them sorted ASAP.


----------



## Paulusworm (Jan 26, 2009)

ami_j said:


> plus what if theres someone with a view to getting DWA? surely people selling DWA animals are checking that the buyers have this license?


If a DWA licence is due to be issued iminantly (sorry for spelling. Tired and on large amount of pain relief :blush how would a potential buyer be able to post that they were interested if it was blocked because they were non DWAL holders?


----------



## paulrimmer69 (Oct 26, 2008)

they could pm the seller?


----------



## maffy (Dec 24, 2008)

*view*

i think its daft restricting posting. Non-DWAL holders interested in buying in the future can't ask about hots. Like me.

Breeders wont make as many connections to interested future buyers.

Anyway DWAL onus is on the buyer not seller, right? Obviously reputable pet stores and breeders ensure the welfare of their snakes but the forum is not "the snake police".

Surely we want an open forum (but free of disruptive or abusive users)?

DWAL holding is not elitism, but experience. Its surely about educating snake prejudice. 

Besides if someone posts positive stuff like "hey thats a beautiful specimen" don't it help sell it?


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

maffy said:


> Besides if someone posts positive stuff like "hey thats a beautiful specimen" don't it help sell it?


Well that part would be against the general classified rules, as you are only meant to post on a thread if interested in buying, otherwise threads turn into picture comments or chat threads


----------



## Paulusworm (Jan 26, 2009)

paulrimmer69 said:


> they could pm the seller?


There are a fair few of us on RFUK who like to post "pm'd you" on the thread to get the seller to check their inbox. If non-DWAL holders cannot post then they may miss out on the animal/price that they want.


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

Why not have one or two dedicated DWA section moderators who can police things to prevent trolls and idiots from getting a foothold. if their posts get deleted before they cause a row, then pretty sooon they'll **** off.


----------



## paulrimmer69 (Oct 26, 2008)

stuartdouglas said:


> Why not have one or two dedicated DWA section moderators who can police things to prevent trolls and idiots from getting a foothold. if their posts get deleted before they cause a row, then pretty sooon they'll **** off.


 
that sound like a job application to me! stuart your hired!


----------



## Paulusworm (Jan 26, 2009)

stuartdouglas said:


> Why not have one or two dedicated DWA section moderators who can police things to prevent trolls and idiots from getting a foothold. if their posts get deleted before they cause a row, then pretty sooon they'll **** off.


 
Good idea (as long as you don't delete me :whistling2. There definately needs to somebody doing it. It's only a matter of time before DWA newbies, like myself, get tarred with the same brush because we don't have the magic piece of paper.


----------



## leecb0 (Apr 14, 2009)

maffy said:


> i think its daft restricting posting. Non-DWAL holders interested in buying in the future can't ask about hots. Like me.
> 
> *If you jave a question ask it on the open forum not the classified adverts*
> 
> ...


Buying a venomous snake is not like buying a non venomous due to the fact that if the said sp is not on your DWAL you need to inform your LA and have it included, also you need to inform your insurer and have it placed on your insurence


----------



## PDR (Nov 27, 2008)

paulrimmer69 said:


> i dont think that restricting it is the answer personally, the main problem on here seems to be kids/nutjobs who come on and pretend to be someone there not, *things have calmed down alot since viperlover was ousted *but there are a few others who just seem to enjoy talking c--p and starting arguments, maybe the answer is getting rid of these people as soon as they start or at least a strong warning?


Hasn’t it just :2thumb:
I’m really hoping we have seen the last of VL. I’ve got him on my “ignore list” on the reptile forums I use.


----------



## PDR (Nov 27, 2008)

Hmmm, so if it was only for DWAL holders would that mean that I would not be able to view the DWAL classifieds?
I don’t have a DWAL, Pet Shop, Zoo, Safari Park or Circus License.
But I do hold a Personal License issued by the UK Home Office and the Hepetarium is inspected and accredited as an animal holding research facility.


----------



## Tehanu (Nov 12, 2006)

PDR said:


> Hmmm, so if it was only for DWAL holders would that mean that I would not be able to view the DWAL classifieds?
> I don’t have a DWAL, Pet Shop, Zoo, Safari Park or Circus License.
> But I do hold a Personal License issued by the UK Home Office and the Hepetarium is inspected and accredited as an animal holding research facility.


Interesting eh! I don't personally hold a DWAL either, but the animals I work with are covered by a Zoo license instead


----------



## zaphod (May 17, 2008)

*dont do it ! please*

Hi i dont usually post on dwa as i dont personally hold a dwal nor do i have any intention of doing so in the near future but......

I enjoy coming ino the dwa section reading the posts from the experienced keepers and dwal holders and potential holders, I think that at the end of the day, why close off sections of the forum to non holders, just because of a few dizzy twits (refrained for me hehe)? and if you intend on closing the classifieds off, say for instance a friend of mine who is also a member and a dwal holder happens to be away and i see a sp. he is looking for i would not be able to inform him? Sorry if im rambling btw just cant see why a few people should spoil it for the majority, if some muppets do start posting on classifieds then cant their posts be deleted and be barred from that particular section or thread? 

kindest regards


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

There's no reason why the section can't be accessible by everyone, just some form of moderation over who posts and rapid moderation and removal of idiots.............I'd be more than happy to do it.......


----------



## tengalms (Feb 5, 2008)

stuartdouglas said:


> Why not have one or two dedicated DWA section moderators who can police things to prevent trolls and idiots from getting a foothold. if their posts get deleted before they cause a row, then pretty sooon they'll **** off.


Being a newbie to the DWA,i think this may be a good idea.

Stuart,are you putting yourself forward for this !!.

Great idea to stop VLs mates joining in.

Roy.


----------



## PDR (Nov 27, 2008)

Saedcantas said:


> Interesting eh! I don't personally hold a DWAL either, but the animals I work with are covered by a Zoo license instead


Yes, a lot of people seem to forget that the DWAL is only for the general public.
Are you still heading up this way next week?


----------



## Tehanu (Nov 12, 2006)

PDR said:


> Yes, a lot of people seem to forget that the DWAL is only for the general public.
> Are you still heading up this way next week?


That's what I forgot to do!!! Reply! 

It seems that people want less benefit of the doubt given here, elsewhere warnings, polite tellings off and monitoring are used as far as possible, are we suggesting that in order for it to work we want an especially harsh forum area where anyone who looks, smells and talks like an idiot or a fantasist is given the boot immediately?


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

I wouldn't say give them the boot immediately, warn them that they aren't behaving "in the spirit" of the section and give them the option, buck up or f*** off...................


----------



## Wills (Sep 10, 2009)

why not just make it password protected and you have to apply for a password which is given out freely but only by the mod team, this way if the general public are not reading the forum section most trols wont bother posting as people wont be reading it lol

also if it does "kick off" it wont damage the forum and is not in the public domain so protects the site


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

stuartdouglas said:


> I wouldn't say give them the boot immediately, warn them that they aren't behaving "in the spirit" of the section and give them the option, buck up or f*** off...................


way to go Stuart!


----------



## paulrimmer69 (Oct 26, 2008)

i think stuart has been well and truly voted in!


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

The moderation team already read & police the DWA forums so you're in good hands already (at least two of us having access to DWA animals via work I believe, not that it matters for moderation purpose).

If you see anyone trolling please do report it, along with any inappropriate posts as always - and anything that doesn't belong in the classifieds section, using the  button on the top left of every post. We can't read every single post on the forums straight away - so we rely basically on every user of the site to help and be willing to report posts that may need action taken on.

So far the DWA section has been pretty good regarding the need for moderation and hopefully adding a classifieds section will not really change that too much.


----------



## maffy (Dec 24, 2008)

Athravan said:


> Well that part would be against the general classified rules, as you are only meant to post on a thread if interested in buying, otherwise threads turn into picture comments or chat threads


I would think that anyone serious about buying a DWA snake will likely PM the seller to arrange to see it. 

:welcome:


----------



## Tehanu (Nov 12, 2006)

stuartdouglas said:


> I wouldn't say give them the boot immediately, warn them that they aren't behaving "in the spirit" of the section and give them the option, buck up or off...................


To be quite honest, this is what we already do.
Hence my asking if you were looking for a stricter forum area.
If people don't think it is enough, then help us out by notifying us of particular situations and people where you feel there is a problem.
Report button or PMs


----------



## paulrimmer69 (Oct 26, 2008)

i agree the mods in general do a good job but you did take a bit too long to get rid of viperlover!


----------



## Tehanu (Nov 12, 2006)

As I keep saying, are you requesting a harsher forum section?

It took a long time to have James restricted from this section because he wasn't particularly doing anything wrong (according to the actual rules) but he was annoying many people who in turn did their own bit to allow topics to be disrupted. :whistling2:

It had to reach a point where the disruption to the whole section was significant enough that we could justify the action. 

This is the same process as occurs in the rest of the forum and unless we were to be more reactionary here and harsher on minor irritations in this section, these kinds of things can and will happen again over time.

I personally would be unhappy at any such change, lets just see how the new classifieds section goes and enjoy the benefit of having it


----------

