Well, after reading lots of this, I really didn't want to get very involved with it, but it seems there is almost no getting around it. Here are my thoughts on all this. It is quite simple to do really.
1) There is absolutely no realistic way kingsnake.com, or anyone else on earth can "police" the lineage of all the snakes out on the market, or look at many of them and be able to tell with any certainty what their exact genetic makeup is anyway. They would need a full-time 24/7 taxonomic panel of people that specialized in the meristics of ALL these types of snakes to even begin to pick-out the fairly obvious examples, and even then there is no way on earth to tell by looks alone on TONS of others, it's just impossible to humanly do.
Are all so-called Hondurans in this hobby pure 100% hondurensis with absolutely zero polyzona, stuarti, or abnorma influence?...absolutely not!,...are all Sinaloan milksnakes pure 100% sinaloae, and no nelsoni influence?....no!. Are all florida kings 100% floridana?.....no!. Are all Eastern chains 100% getula.....no!. Are all Desert kings 100% splendida with zero californiae, or holbrooki influence?....definitely not!. Now since I know all of this to be an absolute bonified fact, and have LOTS of experience in the meristic identification of many of these different types, I can also say with absolute certainty that neither I, nor anybody else on this planet can simply look at certain snakes and tell what the precise subspecific lineage of many of these snakes really are. Only the more textbook perfect examples of some of these can you know with any substantial certainty. Other's can even look identical to a pure subspecies, but actually have a very substantial amount of geneflow from other subspecies and you would never know it at all.
Now the categorizing the milksnakes separately was a great idea in my opinion, as well as many of the other changes that were made. Since it is virtually impossible to discern the genetic lineage to any accurate degree of subspecific level with many snakes these days, it would really be best to put all the kings (L.getula) back into one big category like before, but maybe the known man-made crosses could be put just below the other ads there in the same exact page when it is clicked on. This way they would still be in the same exact area and still be well-seen by all. Then all the hassle is off of KS and as always for decades pior just like any show or whatever.......simply "BUYER BEWARE", and life goes on....simple as that. 
As it is now though, I think "pandora's box" is simply left wide open for far too much red tape and major controversy.
I have been deeply involved with owning and studying coutless thousands of snakes since 1967, now if I cannot tell what the lineages of many milksnakes, kingsnakes, ratsnakes, and many others are in this hobby, I'ts togh to imagine how anyone else can. Sure, some things are quite obvious, and many I and many other folks can usually pick-out many non-pure subspecies fairly quickly, but it all depends on the percentages of what types of subspecies produced any given animal as to how easy it is to distinguish it from a true-blue genuine subspecies. Many snakes are not even 50-50 crosses either, and this adds further to the problem. Then add to that some individual variation, etc... and it can be enough to make your head spin as to exactly what certain snakes are..LOL!
Anyway, if the kings were put back together, and simply leave the problem of identifying their lineage between the seller and the buyer, it would make everything as easy as pie once again. I just don't see how it can work smoothly without tons of "issues" otherwise.
cheers everyone, ~Doug
-----
"a snake in the grass is a GOOD thing"
my website -serpentinespecialties.webs.com
thomas
my toilet is broken. And I'd rather it be someone else's hat