Could this have anything to do with it?

Anne, you are always welcome in the Training section.  I personally avoid the CM section like the plague.  I actually HAVE made repeated attempts to try and ask questions to understand why the devotion, but have found myself to be as welcome as ants at a picnic, for the most part.

Anne, we all value your knowledge, experience and expertise, myself included, as evidenced by my PM to you when I got my puppy. I am going to address each of your points, your quote will be in red.

quote:
I was distressed to find that dog.com offers Cesar Millan's book, but does not offer pat MIller's book
I will pass on your recommendation. We are always in the process of adding new product. I know that they were looking for additional trainers to carry in both horse and dog, so I will make sure that this reaches the proper people.

quote:
I am also saddened at the level of moderating lately.
Good, because we are saddened at some of the behavior lately. Do you think that we like editing a conversation that could be a productive learning experience for everyone?

quote:
...quite a lot of it from one overzealous CM fan...
Not only is this a personal insult, it's not completely accurate, either. The Mod in question practices positive reinforcement with her dog, more than any other method. Try asking about someone's beliefs before assuming. 
 
quote:
...merely stated that I could not have said discussion on the CM threads...
Merely? Here's what the Mod edited: quote: Here's the place for everyone who gets censored on the CM threads when you try to make sensible arguments against rolling a dog, or "putting it on its side". It's inflammatory, at best, and deragotary, at worst. The way to "merely" state it would be something like this: "Because of the recent discussion of the Alpha Roll (insert link here for reference), I thought it would be a good idea to investigate the other side - why we SHOULDN'T roll a dog. Since this is against CM's beliefs, I am posting this in General Chat, out of respect for that section's rules." Is that so difficult??

quote:
The person is cruising the board trying to shut me up so that I can't spout any positive training info anywhere where she is.
Again, I find this doubtful on not one, but two levels. First, I'm sure that said Mod has better things to do, and said Mod practices primarily POSITIVE training herself!

quote:
All there is now is bickering and childishness.
No disrespect here, but how, exactly, does this thread differ?

quote:
I think the moderating there stinks.
Thank you for your opinion. I'm sure that there are others who share it, but as many who refute it. That's what makes the world go round.

Lastly, this entire post violates rule 7: "If you have a problem or complaint about the forum in general, or with another member, please either fill out a ticket or address it directly to the administrators or moderators. They will evaluate the situation and execute the proper actions." 

Yeah, I feel so valued.  I am really overwhelmed by all the love.

ORIGINAL: Personal Champ


Lastly, this entire post violates rule 7: "If you have a problem or complaint about the forum in general, or with another member, please either fill out a ticket or address it directly to the administrators or moderators. They will evaluate the situation and execute the proper actions." 

So you can't post problems or complaints about the forum in the "How are we doing?" section?  Well then I guess you're doing just fine.  []

I understand Anne's point of view.  I feel somewhat the same. 

I think in my case it is from a different angle.  I see one particular forum member that is giving out advice on dealing with high energy dogs, aggressive situations, and basic behavior, when said member has absolutely no practical experience with having a high energy dog, or having a multi-dog household.  Yet to disagree, even politely, with this member is considered taboo.  This particular member never relates on behavior issues that have been addressed with this member's own dog, nor relates stories or anecdotes about difficulties/challenges in order to demonstrate a point.  IMO personal experience rates much higher than "I read it in a book" or "I heard it at a seminar."

That is why I have stayed out of the "Behavior" section.  It does seem that only one particular member's views are valued.  Every other opinion seems to be squelched, or at the very least obscured.

I understand that the behavior on the forum got quite ugly recently.  I have noticed a change for the better though.  I hope it continues to better. 

I don't see the point of continually harping on things that will/can not change.  If I may suggest, spend time in the Introduction Area doing the meet and greet.  You have the opportunity to meet new members and be creative in drawing out information about them.  You can also talk about yourself and your dog experience.  It is also a place where you can have fun.  For me, it is good practice on how to be nice and respectful to fellow members.

Ummm, I kind of doubt that a woman as busy as Anne wants to go hang out in the meet and greet area and act like the Walmart welcomer.
 
Anne is a skilled trainer.  Why should she be reduced to "hi, welcome to idog"?  She has some valuable information to share and should be able to do just that so long as she does so in a respectful manner and without name calling.  Regardless of what section she chooses to post in.
 
Jaime had the very best of intentions when she started the CM section.  Unfortunately, some members have taken it to be their very own sand box where absolutely no one who has not "taken the oath" is allowed to play.  I don't think that this was EVER the intent.

I know, though, what DPU is saying. I find it embarrassing, quite frankly, that there is SO much red ink practice going on, and at the discretion of just a few.
 
Having run and managed group counseling sessions before, the group is at its strongest when its memebers manage behavior--not when one person does. Granted, there have to be rules--but the rules here have been creeping out bit by bit.
 
I thought one was red inked when they used foul or threatening language. Disagreeing? Discouraging? Pointing out flaws?
 
That should be OK on a forum. As you've pointed out many times, DPU--there are all kinds of dogs out there that require somebody trying out lots of things in order to find success.
 
BTW, thanks to Anne, I do have my "forever" dog. I would hope others could benefit from her consistent voice as well.
 
PS--I miss seeing you around, DPU.

  ORIGINAL:  Glenmar

Ummm, I kind of doubt that a woman as busy as Anne wants to go hang out in the meet and greet area and act like the Walmart welcomer.

I always like it when Nfowler enters a thread.  Always nice to see you.  You know I purposely deleted my comment about how embarrassing this is.  I am at the entrance to the forum singing its praise and at the other end of the forum, we have this exchange going on. 

I spend time here because I like this forum and the characters in it.  Oh yes, we have characters here so strong in personality and a one of kind way of message deliveries.  We have from Spiritdogs with her staunch unshakeable views, to Ron2 with his innocent flirtations, to the technocrat Mrv, to Callie with her passion for a healthy dog, to the witty Deb53, to Denise M with her common sense approach, to DPU and his excessive harping and everyone else in between.  I am ok with you all!  I freely choose to use my time to read your post because you are interesting and I enjoy them.

My comment on moderation is that it is heavy.  The Admin and Mods are only human and they can't help interjecting their own beliefs in their moderation style.  The lighter the moderation the tendency is less of that happening.  What I see is a disruption in the natural offset to balance the characters strong in personality.  In attempting to manage one individual you indirectly suppress the opposing side.  Yes, I have posting style and some members have been DPUed but I think it strengthens or soften their views and definitely draws out more of an explanation of their views.  The moderation definitely makes the threads boring.

Now to get at Glenmar's quote.  Glenmar is one of forum's characters and her delivery is such that I can never be offended by her.  Simply, I respect her.   That particular quote has all the elements in it that I like to point out to members and poke fun of.  Some members may see that quote as ok and other may see it as insulting.  It is ok because it is a nice thing to say about "Anne” (who is Anne?).  It I ok because it says "Anne” (who is Anne?) spends her time here to help members and is very caring about the dog.  It is insulting because it demeans the "Walmart welcomer” because these are normally senior citizens supplementing their social security checks.  It is insulting to the members who post in the Introduction Area as if our contributions to the forum are unimportant.  It is insulting to members because it elevates one above most others.  It is insulting because it says one area of the forum is more important than another.  The quote also shows that members will unintentionally insult in order to show their blind support or friendship for another member. 

A good exercise for the Admin and Moderators is get together and discuss whether that quote should be red inked.  If there is a difference of opinions then the Admin should make the decision and the Moderators should learn, try and understand, and live with the decision. The group should continue the exercise with other quotes so that eventually the moderation style is somewhat consistent and all have the same understanding of what the Admin wants.  IMO, it should not be red inked.  Others can/will then learn from this.

My last comment is to ask that if you don't identify the target of your post, such as what Spiritdogs did, does that make it ok to flame?  We all know who she is talking about so why disguise it.

My deepest apologies to the Walmart welcomers and those that have the time to spend a lot of time in the meet and greet.  David's comment sounded to me like he was suggesting that that was ALL Anne should do, and there is not much incentive for her to remain with idog if that's all she's "allowed" to do.
 
Perhaps those of us who seem to annoy everyone so much should just find someplace else to hang out.

ORIGINAL: DPU

A good exercise for the Admin and Moderators is get together and discuss whether that quote should be red inked.  If there is a difference of opinions then the Admin should make the decision and the Moderators should learn, try and understand, and live with the decision. The group should continue the exercise with other quotes so that eventually the moderation style is somewhat consistent and all have the same understanding of what the Admin wants.  IMO, it should not be red inked but as Xerox says "met" which is what I did.  Others will then learn from this.

Why is it that the most important part of my post and the most on topic is overlooked.

Glenmar, don't apologize, your comment was innocent but I was demonostrating how innocent comments can be taken in a different way.  It was "met" so it is ok. 

I was not suggesting the "Anne" (who is Anne?) should only stay in that area but visit from time to time to possibly change her focus.  Actually, I was suggesting that to all members. 

If you are implying you annoy others, that is not my experience.  You should feel free to go in any area and express yourself as yourself and not worry about being herded.  People know you and know how to take you, same here.

I do occasionally pop on to the welcome threads, and I certainly do not think of a Walmart greeter as "less than", nor do I think Glenda does.  That is a phrase that has made it in to the lexicon, whether rightly or wrongly, and is now a colloquialism.  So, red inking that would be tantamount to red inking someone for saying "have a good day" because 90% of the people who say it don't mean it.
And, Nancy's point is well taken.  No one objects to anyone saying that they have had experience, or something worked for their dog, or even a friend's dog or the dogs at the shelter where you volunteer.  But, when you give advice, you have to remember that the person you are posting to might just take that advice, and if you really don't know what you are doing as to that particular problem, it's probably safer to give no advice or wish the person luck, or recommend a book on the subject, than it is to give random advice that you aren't sure is right.  First, do no harm.  And, frankly, the idea of shutting a trainer up on the CM threads is counter to the advice he gives - he tells people to seek out a professional.  So, why is everyone so afraid over there to hear from one???

So, why is everyone so afraid over there to hear from one

That's the best line in this whole thread. I just had to say that.

And DPU, does this mean you like me, you really, really, like me?[] I didn't realize that I was flirting, innocently or otherwise.

Anyway, I have seen, more than once on an episode of Dog Whisperer where CM has pinned and rolled a dog, or grabbed it by the throat as a means of "rehabilitation." I don't see how Anne's comments were that bad. The censorship, where someone else decides what we adults may or may not read, made the rest of her OP a bit odd. The title however gave the clue. She was stating a truth, if a bit bold. You cannot disagree with CM techniques in the CM section, per the rules. So, she started a thread in another section where one could disagree with the use of alpha rolling, so as not to violate the rules of that other section. I don't think she meant to be contentious, simply to express her opinion. And I know the mods have a tough job. What is worth censoring? What can be left alone?

But it is interesting that dog.com is selling CM books. I didn't know that. But I know who was on the Grassy Knoll.[]

But I know who was on the Grassy Knoll.

Ron, please don't insinuate another conspiracy...look where the last one got us...[]