Chocolate Chip Starfish

[jrnannery]

I have a friend who has a 55 gal FOWLR, and he wishes to get rid of this critter. I think it would be fair to trade a couple of low-light corals for it, maybe a few polyps of something. See this link: http://www.maast.org/showthread.php?69758-Low-Light-Corals . If you are interested, please let me know, and I will help to arrange the trade. He is motivated to get the starfish out of the tank. I am cross-listing the star in the For Sale category as well, if you would prefer to just purchase it. Chocolate Chip Starfish, Reddish/Orange-ish, about 4" diameter

Thanks for looking.

[jrnannery]

According to Item 7(d) of the Terms of Use, "Items posted for sale must belong to you and be in your possession." I am going to assume that this also means items offered for trade. Therefore, I will advise my friend to take the livestock to an LFS, where he will receive next to nothing for it, where it will in turn be marked up dramatically, causing a member of MAAST who may otherwise have wished to aquire said livestock cheaply to pay double or more what it was listed for here on the site, even moreso had the aquiring member decided to trade a few zoa polyps from his/her own tank for the animal. This will likely have the effect of causing my friend to refrain from joining this site, at which point this organization fails to realize goals one and six of the Our Purpose statement on the homepage.

As the thread listing the offending animal in the For Sale forum has been removed for violation of the Terms of Use, I would ask therefore that this thread also be removed. Startling the trouble a single four inch diameter starfish can stir up.

[allan]

Richard,

I wouldn't take such a drastic action... and I hope you can appreciate the efforts that went into safeguarding the site, the sponsor, and the members when this rule was inacted.

Rest assured that your post wasn't out of line, definitely not worth the effort you put into the comment above, but imagine with me if you will the extremes that such a rule prevents. Not you. Not me. Not the majority of our membership. But those few that would rape the system to their own needs.

I'd like leave this post in place, pending the review of the BOD and Mod squad, as I do NOT believe that it's in violation. I hope that we can come eye to eye on this matter.

Allan

[jrnannery]

Allan, I don't hold it against you, as you are doing the job you are tasked with, or volunteered for. My issue is with the rules, or rather the spirit of the rules.

If it isn't you or me or the majority of the membership, but rather the few that would rape the system, then they should be as easy to pick off as I was. I dislike the idea that a responsible paying member must be sidelined in the absence of a serious offender (spirit of the rule).
I recognize that there are two schools of thought when it comes to rules: the black-and-whiters, and those that will adapt the rules to fit a particular scenario. I don't mind being a black-and-white guy, but if the application of the rule grossly overshadows the intended target of the rule, then there is a problem. Absolutists will have a field day with that line of argument.

I respectfully bow out of the fray. Do with this thread what you will. I will advise my friend to take his livestock elsewhere. No offense intended.