Can we talk about others dogs?

On Fri, 14 May 2010 19:32:13 -0400, "cshenk" wrote:


>I love approval or just recognition. I will almost drool on my chest when I
>say something interesting enough to be replied to. That doesnt however fit
>in the long term in making this 'the Cash and Muttley show'.

I think you, and maybe Paul, are the only one who thought this
newsgroup was becoming the Cash and Muttley show.

>I wanna hear the person with a doxie and unsure how to shift them from
>pee-pad . I wanna hear the person with a German Shepard with a flea issue
>ask how to control it. I want someone with a sheep dog tell me how the heck
>you comb that!

But it's not a grooming newsgroup or a health newsgroup. When
rpdbehavior was really active, there were lots of off-topic
discusisons, but those were in the midst of on-topic discussions.
This also isn't a teaching newsgroup, so it's unlikely that someone
with a sheepdog is going to come on and tell everyone how s/he grooms
his/her dog, anymore than I would start pontificating about grooming
Borzoi or Siberians or what have you. And there is no such thing as a
German Shepard (it's Shepherd, as in sheep-herding dog, which is what
a German Shepherd is).

>I do not deny I am attention driven. I am. I however try to make this fun
>for all and really, I wanna see what others have to say. Motto here is
>'it's not about me, or my dog, but your dog and you'.

You're the only one trying to make this all about you and your dog.
If people have questions, they'll ask them, like starcat just did. It
seems that you're trying to make this newsgroup into something it
isn't meant to be, is not, and never will be. There are all sorts of
groups out there for chatting about dogs or other subjects, and most
of them are moderated so people can't be mean. Or, for people who
really love attention, there's always Facebook, where people post to
the world what they're doing and how they're feeling and what they
think about any and every conceivable subject.
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

"Dogman" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote:

>>>>Grin, while i would welcome a conversation on leashes,
>>> Then why not start one?

>>Attributes can be confusing. I was telling *him* to start one.

> Who is "him"?

The person you deleted from the attributes then asked who he was.

>>> Say, in the .behavior group, as it pertains to training.

>>Lets seege to your list:

> What does that mean?

Means I moved your list out of the order of your post.

>>> r.p.d.behavior - For the discussion of canine behavior, obedience
>>> training, problems, fixes, etc.
>>> r.p.d.health - For the discussion of canine health issues.

Both valid and I am in both.

>>> r.p d.activities - For the discussion of canine activities, e.g.,
>>> agility,
>>> field trials, etc.
>>> r.p d.breeds - For the discusion of various canine breeds,
>>> standards,
>>> and breeding info.
>>> r.p.d.rescue - For the discussion of canine rescue, adoption, etc.
>>> r.p.d.misc - For the discussion of any other canine topic, photo
>>> links, etc.
>>> r.p.d.info - Official newsgroup, breed, activity, etc., FAQs.
>>
>>Only RPD.health and RPD.behaviour exist. The rest are dead.
>
> No, they are not dead. They exist, and they are very welcoming to
> newcomers. Just make it a point to initiate pertinent discussions in
> the appropriate group, and then, voila! They will, just as surely as
> the Frankenstein monster, come alive!

They have insufficient traffic to be worth pulling. As newsgroups get
smaller because more people are using facebook and other venues, the traffic
tends to concentrate to the remaining larger ones.

> No, talking about "running their dog" in the .behavior group wastes
> the time of people who have no interest in learning about ways to run
> their dog.

It was a thread on training and seeking advice on the best ways to go about
it. People not interested just could ignore the thread.

> By taking flea prevention posts to .activities:

??? There was a thread on that? All I saw was Char's bit on how the
vaccinatioons and flea meds were bad.

> 2. Be adhering to newsgroup protocol.

LOL, wasn't it you who told me not to be a net-nanny?

> All you have to do is to start using it. Today, for example.

So, you don't like the traffic that has been building here? Me I think it's
a good thing that more are talking.

> Why do you insist on being so obtuse?

Why do you feel you have to control the traffic?

>>Skjorning was a link that lead to another lead much like the spinger but
>>attachable to my bike.
>
> So...what?

So, I found useful advice here on a tool I can use to help me train my dog
better. I showed it to my spine-doc yesterday (had him bring up the link
and ran the demo online). He thinks it seems neat and wanted me to check
with the vets to make sure the harness style will work right with it.

Short version: stopped by vet this morning with printed pics and note from
my spine-doc (no potholes and level surface only). Vet says yes if I go
slow and to watch hot pavement. Same distances allowed (1/2-3/4 miles
only). Vet wants him dual leashed with Charlotte on the other side at the
start until he's well used to it. No collar leashing allowed, but harness
is perfect and he'll get more exercise. We have to watch his behavior
carefully so he doesnt get startled. That brings us round circle to the
thread on running and behavior to watch for.

> Are you just unable to focus on just one topic at a time?

Grin, men think linearly. Women have tangents.

> about, for example, training, could do so in .behavior, without having
> to be inundated with all the "side topics"?

Then ignore me. Kill filters work fine for that.

> Feel free to talk about anything you want there.
>
> But please don't do that here, in .behavior.

Forgive me, I was unaware you were the moderator of this group.
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

On Sat, 15 May 2010 13:15:08 -0400, "cshenk" wrote:


>Grin, men think linearly. Women have tangents.

Speak for yourself, please.

>> about, for example, training, could do so in .behavior, without having
>> to be inundated with all the "side topics"?
>
>Then ignore me. Kill filters work fine for that.
>
>> Feel free to talk about anything you want there.
>>
>> But please don't do that here, in .behavior.
>
>Forgive me, I was unaware you were the moderator of this group.

What's different about Dogman telling you what shouldn't get discussed
here and you telling him what should be?
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

"Dogman" wrote
> "cshenk" wrote:

>>>>>>Grin, while i would welcome a conversation on leashes,
>>>>> Then why not start one?
>>
>>>>Attributes can be confusing. I was telling *him* to start one.
>>
>>> Who is "him"?
>>
>>The person you deleted from the attributes then asked who he was.
>
> Then why not use his name, to eliminate any confusion? You were
> talking about a lot of things, Carol, not just Schoen's leash.

Paul I think it was.

>>>>> Say, in the .behavior group, as it pertains to training.

>>>>Lets seege to your list:

>>> What does that mean?

>>Means I moved your list out of the order of your post.

> I looked up the word "seege," and lo and behold, I found no such word.
> So somewhere in that brain of yours, the word "seege" somehow means
> "moving a list out of order"?
> If not, what exactly does it mean? And in what dictionary did you find
> it?
> Look, I don't want to raz someone who may have a legitimate learning
> disorder. Do you have one?

Yes, I have dyslexia. It was mentioned in a post to Char.

> It's nothing to be embarassed about.

Nope, nor am I worried if my spelling tends to be 'unique' or folks notice
it. I got over that a long time ago. Now and again I trip over a word I
never knew I spelled wrong as it looks right to me.

Means (even if not spelled right) to 'shift' or 'to change' or 'move
sideways'. Transition or to transit sideways would be another meaning. I
tried dictionary.com but didnt find it. Irritating.

>>>>> r.p.d.behavior - For the discussion of canine behavior, obedience
>>>>> training, problems, fixes, etc.
>>>>> r.p.d.health - For the discussion of canine health issues.
>>
>>Both valid and I am in both.

> You can be in any or all of them.

Yes, *obvuiously*.

> There's a post right now in .activities; someone wants to discuss
> running their dog.

There have been 15 posts this year in rpd.activities. They are all spam
except your *own* post asking about springers. Apparently trying to move
people to there is my guess?

Nothing wrong with that but if all that group has is spam in the last 5
months, (without even a reply to the spam) I call it a dead group.

> And it's a chance for you to do the right thing, Carol.

I prefer to try to get more people here. Get 'a' group going well then span
out when you need to split things due to too much traffic.

> They have little traffic because inconsiderate people like you insist
> upon ignoring them.

Then that is how it is.

>>> No, talking about "running their dog" in the .behavior group wastes
>>> the time of people who have no interest in learning about ways to run
>>> their dog.
>>
>>It was a thread on training and seeking advice on the best ways to go
>>about
>>it. People not interested just could ignore the thread.
>
> Or..according to Usenet protocol, you could have taken the post to the
> right group, .activities.

Is Caroline even bothering to read that one anymore?

>>??? There was a thread on that? All I saw was Char's bit on how the
>>vaccinatioons and flea meds were bad.
>
> That was my mistake.

No worries. Happens.

> I meant to say "running my dog", not flea prevention.

So you feel that discussing training in general and behavior in specific is
not allowed here? Personally I found Caroline's information invaulable and
have more questions for her. They *may* help others as well. That it lead
to a specific training device and now back to how to use it best, shouldnt
be a problem. I want to learn from her and you shouldnt be playing
net-nanny preventing it.

>>> 2. Be adhering to newsgroup protocol.
>>
>>LOL, wasn't it you who told me not to be a net-nanny?
>
> That's not being a net-nanny, Carol.
> It's an attempt to get the dog groups running like they used to run.

Get over it. They wont. Cox is cutting newsgroups too. Thats the last big
provider of 'one stop shopping' for newsgroups. I'll shift to giganews. We
will get smaller and concentrating assets to groups that have valid traffic
is going to happen.

>>So, you don't like the traffic that has been building here? Me I think
>>it's
>>a good thing that more are talking.
>
> It is a good thing, and it could be an even better thing if the
> talking was taking place in the right group.

Wishful thinking. I prefer to live in the real world. rpd.activities was
really popular in 2005. You can see it drift down until it is just 'come
see my blog' or 'buy this tool from me' spam.

Wanna revive it? You do it. I'm working on this one to some level of
success.

> To make it even easier for newbies to find information they're looking
> for. For example, what newbie would ever think to look for information
> regarding flea prevention in the .behavior group?

Um, there was no good info on flea prevention here.

>>> Why do you insist on being so obtuse?

>>Why do you feel you have to control the traffic?

> Because it makes it easier for newbies to find the information they're
> looking for, because it's the right way to do things, and because it's
> Usenet protocol.

Interesting. I find it non-functional to direct people to dead groups. I
guess we just have to agree to disagree on that one.

>>>>Skjorning was a link that lead to another lead much like the spinger but
>>>>attachable to my bike.
>>>
>>> So...what?
>>
>>So, I found useful advice here on a tool I can use to help me train my dog
>>better. I showed it to my spine-doc yesterday (had him bring up the link
>>and ran the demo online). He thinks it seems neat and wanted me to check
>>with the vets to make sure the harness style will work right with it.
>>
>>Short version: stopped by vet this morning with printed pics and note
>>from
>>my spine-doc (no potholes and level surface only). Vet says yes if I go
>>slow and to watch hot pavement. Same distances allowed (1/2-3/4 miles
>>only). Vet wants him dual leashed with Charlotte on the other side at the
>>start until he's well used to it. No collar leashing allowed, but harness
>>is perfect and he'll get more exercise. We have to watch his behavior
>>carefully so he doesnt get startled. That brings us round circle to the
>>thread on running and behavior to watch for.
>
> I read all of the above. Then I read it again. And I still have no
> idea what that "useful device" actually is.

http://www.thedogoutdoors.com/dog-bike-leash.html

> And furthermore, this belongs in .activities, and there's already a
> thread about this very topic over there.


No, there is a single post by YOU trying to move the traffic over there but
Caroline, who knows this stuff is HERE.

>>> Are you just unable to focus on just one topic at a time?
>>
>>Grin, men think linearly. Women have tangents.
>
> Could tangents by any chance mean "scatterbrained"?

If you prefer to believe that.

> Otherwise I have no idea what "tangents" mean. I inspected my wife at
> great length (much to her delight) and I found no "tangents."

Hehe I bet that was a fun trip!

I'll try to back down though on 'CEO' sorta terms usage here. There was no
intent to confuse although it happened.

> Moreoever, I don't think the vast majority of women, or men, are
> scatterbrained, but some obviously are.
>
> Are they the ones you're referring to?

I didt use the term scatterbrained, you did. For a person who desires only
on topic posts, tyhis is a pretty odd request.
Ask me again if you want more OT stuff.

>>> about, for example, training, could do so in .behavior, without having
>>> to be inundated with all the "side topics"?
>>
>>Then ignore me. Kill filters work fine for that.
>
> I can do that, of course, but I'd rather try and convince you to do
> the right thing, and to have you understand why it's the right thing.
> I'm a patient man.

Ok, do you grasp the concept that your posting one note in rpd.activities
doesnt make it work to move a topic on how to train a dog to run with a bike
when all the folks I can find who have experience are here? Just checking.

>>> But please don't do that here, in .behavior.

>>Forgive me, I was unaware you were the moderator of this group.
>
> I'm not the moderator of any newsgroup, Carol, but I would like to see
> the dog groups rebound. If I can get people like you to help me do
> that, it may still be possible.
> Why would you not want to help me?

Functionality. Grow one group up until it needs to be split. There is no
critical traffic load here yet.

When I came in about 6 months ago (guessing) the traffic was 1-2 a week. It
seemed to be largely Char responding to every post with raw feeding and use
no meds or vaccines. Now we run as much as 20 a day.

My take is give it time to grow from seedling to sapling before asking it be
'split' again to what suited in 2005 or so with multiple rpd groups.
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

"cshenk" wrote in message

> "Dogman" wrote
>> "cshenk" wrote:
>
Dogman>> Then why not use his name, to eliminate any confusion? You were
>> talking about a lot of things, Carol, not just Schoen's leash.
>
cshenk> Paul I think it was.

Actually, I was talking about special items such as the GL head collar and
the EZ walk harness, as well as some nice regular collars and leashes that
were on sale.


cshenk> Lets seege to your list:
>
Dogman> What does that mean?
>
cshenk> Means I moved your list out of the order of your post.
>
Dogman> I looked up the word "seege," and lo and behold, I found no such
word.

I think she meant segue, which is pronounced "Segway", as the two-wheeled
vehicle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segue

Seege sounds like it should be followed by "Heil", and that's not good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sieg
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_salute
But I'm not making fun of dyslexia, or anyone who may be a "Miss Peller". :)


cshenk> Means (even if not spelled right) to 'shift' or 'to change' or 'move
> sideways'. Transition or to transit sideways would be another meaning. I
> tried dictionary.com but didnt find it. Irritating.
>
>
> I prefer to try to get more people here. Get 'a' group going well then
> span out when you need to split things due to too much traffic.
>
Dorman>> Or..according to Usenet protocol, you could have taken the post to
the
>> right group, .activities.
>
> Is Caroline even bothering to read that one anymore?
>
Let's face it. Usenet is imploding except for a few active NGs. Sometimes
the specific subgroup no longer has much meaning, and people are attracted
to those that are active. I looked for activity in the rec.pets.cats.* genre
and the one that seemed to be used the most, by far, was
rec.pets.cats.anecdotes. I no longer subscribe because I no longer have a
cat, and many people there are, well, "catty"!

Since there are three or four reasonably active categories in the dogs NGs,
(behavior, breeds, health, and rescue), I see no reason to attempt to
rejuvenate a cadaver such as activities. There aren't many newbies, and many
ISPs have dropped usenet in the last year, so only a tech-savvy newbie will
even think about usenet. If they do, they will probably search for one with
recent posts. Otherwise they might as well post to alt.device.null:
http://www.newsreaders.com/link/link.cgi?group=alt.dev.null


Dogman>>>> 2. Be adhering to newsgroup protocol.
>>>
cshenk>>>LOL, wasn't it you who told me not to be a net-nanny?
>>
Dogman>> That's not being a net-nanny, Carol.
>> It's an attempt to get the dog groups running like they used to run.
>
cshenk> Get over it. They wont. Cox is cutting newsgroups too. Thats the
last big
> provider of 'one stop shopping' for newsgroups. I'll shift to giganews.
> We will get smaller and concentrating assets to groups that have valid
> traffic is going to happen.

Exactly. But try TeraNews. Tera is 10 times Giga is ten times Mega. Is there
a Pet-a-news?


Dogman>> It is a good thing, and it could be an even better thing if the
>> talking was taking place in the right group.
>
cshenk> Wishful thinking. I prefer to live in the real world.
rpd.activities was
> really popular in 2005. You can see it drift down until it is just 'come
> see my blog' or 'buy this tool from me' spam.
>
> Wanna revive it? You do it. I'm working on this one to some level of
> success.

Me too!


Dogman>> To make it even easier for newbies to find information they're
looking
>> for. For example, what newbie would ever think to look for information
>> regarding flea prevention in the .behavior group?
>
cshenk> Um, there was no good info on flea prevention here.
>
>>>Why do you feel you have to control the traffic?
>
Dogman>> Because it makes it easier for newbies to find the information
they're
>> looking for, because it's the right way to do things, and because it's
>> Usenet protocol.
>
> Interesting. I find it non-functional to direct people to dead groups. I
> guess we just have to agree to disagree on that one.

Yup!


Dogman>> I read all of the above. Then I read it again. And I still have no
>> idea what that "useful device" actually is.
>
cshenk> http://www.thedogoutdoors.com/dog-bike-leash.html
>
Dogman>> And furthermore, this belongs in .activities, and there's already a
>> thread about this very topic over there.
>
cshenk> No, there is a single post by YOU trying to move the traffic over
there but
> Caroline, who knows this stuff is HERE.
>
One stop shopping. Yes!!!


Dogman>>>> Are you just unable to focus on just one topic at a time?
>>>
cshenk>>> Grin, men think linearly. Women have tangents.
>>
Dogman>> Could tangents by any chance mean "scatterbrained"?
>
cshenk> If you prefer to believe that.
>
Dogman>> Otherwise I have no idea what "tangents" mean. I inspected my wife
at
>> great length (much to her delight) and I found no "tangents."
>
cshenk> Hehe I bet that was a fun trip!

Some women do have "ten-gents". They are gentlemen who are well-bronzed by
the sun, and they might be found lurking in the bushes...


Dogman>>>> But please don't do that here, in .behavior.
>
cshenk>>>Forgive me, I was unaware you were the moderator of this group.
>>
Dogman>> I'm not the moderator of any newsgroup, Carol, but I would like to
see
>> the dog groups rebound. If I can get people like you to help me do
>> that, it may still be possible.
>> Why would you not want to help me?
>
cshenk> Functionality. Grow one group up until it needs to be split. There
is no
> critical traffic load here yet.
>
> When I came in about 6 months ago (guessing) the traffic was 1-2 a week.
> It seemed to be largely Char responding to every post with raw feeding and
> use no meds or vaccines. Now we run as much as 20 a day.
>
> My take is give it time to grow from seedling to sapling before asking it
> be 'split' again to what suited in 2005 or so with multiple rpd groups.

As the "whine" said, "My sediments exactly" !

Paul and Muttley
www.muttleydog.com
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:43:58 -0400, Dogman wrote:

>On Sat, 15 May 2010 09:20:58 -0400, sighthounds & siberians
> wrote:
>
>>Or, for people who
>>really love attention, there's always Facebook, where people post to
>>the world what they're doing and how they're feeling and what they
>>think about any and every conceivable subject.
>
>Facebook! That's a perfect place for someone like Carol, or even
>Schoen, for that matter, because it's all about getting attention.

It certainly seems to be. I would be embarrassed to post most of
what's on there. What cracks me up is all the furor over privacy
issues - hello, did you think you could put all kinds of personal
information in your profile and post to the world about everything
you're doing, and no one would be able to retrieve that? Or, rather,
that no one would retrieve it because FB owners are honorable people
who aren't interested in making money from your data in any way
possible?

>But apparently, even for the old regulars, not so much about the dogs.

A few of the old regulars talk a lot about what their dogs are doing,
but for some reason they're not using the 'forum' so that the dog talk
is intespersed with all the general stuff. And there is virtually no
discussion of general behavior/training questions/problems/issues.

>Sigh.

Indeed.
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs? 

On Sat, 15 May 2010 16:59:35 -0400, "cshenk" wrote:


>I am sorry you have visual issues. I can not suddenly become non-dyslexic
>however just because of them. I do not 'see' the typos.

What do you think spellcheck is for?

>It's like beating on a blind person who due to screenreader software that
>works with their platform, has to top post if they do not have a sighted
>person to place and click the cursor for them.
>
>Dont worry, you arent the first person to note it nor will you be the last.
>
>Your comment about 'all about me' is completely uncalled for in this
>context. Most just accept it and move on.

You really are completely clueless, aren't you? I'm not making fun of
your spelling. My brother is learning disabled, though not dyslexic,
and his spelling is much, much worse than yours. So, he uses
spellcheck, and voila, people can decipher what he's saying. I said
you seem to think it's all about you, because you've said you don't
want to take the time to use spellcheck. You don't mind if your
'typos' make things more difficult for others, because you don't want
to use spellcheck. And that, madam, is selfish and inconsiderate.

>Now, can we get back to talking about dogs?

Sure, you go right ahead.
 >> Stay informed about: Can we talk about others dogs?