I'm all for controversial topics and differences of opinion. I like a hearty debate as much as the next guy, even if does get heated and tempers spike a bit. It can stretch the mind and be exhilarating. Differences in opinion is what generates discussion, the opportunity to see different view points and to learn. There is NO argument from me on that score. NONE. We've had many such debates and that is the very nature and essence of a forum. So, please stop insinuating that people who are leaving this forum or spending less time here are against that. They're against people who abuse and mistreat animals.
What I am staunchly against, is supporting people who molest, abuse and exploit animals to the animals' ruination. Cruelty to animals is not a mistake or a mere difference of opinion. If anyone has the ability to half drown a dog, make a dog "think" he is drowning or can helicopter a dog until it passes out from lack of blood and oxygen to its brain, who strikes dogs with sticks or mass produces puppies and houses them in little tiny cages, one on top of another, where puppies are lying and dying in their own feces, NO AMOUNT OF EDUCATION or discussion is going to make a hill of beans of a difference. If it doesn't occur to someone that these things are cruel, they do not possess empathy. Without empathy, they can not put themselves in anyone else's shoes and therefore are unable to process information the way normal people do. There is something so very wrong with people with no empathy, that (you can ask any psychologist) there is an extreme inability or impossibility to modify that.
To allow people like Martin Richling, for example....(probably a narcissist) to linger on a forum is to give him "air time." It is to support him. The point isn't whether people will follow him or not. Only a real monster would do those things to animals. The point is that it is a reinforcer for him to be allowed to spew his abuse all over a dog forum, to upset people and very importantly to draw everyone into his outlandish, attention seeking, trolling behavior. (Behavior reinforced is behavior which is perpetuated.) It draws people AWAY from regular members who are perhaps seeking help with a serious behavior problem, health problem, who want to share a success story and more. So, other members do not get the attention they would otherwise likely get.
There is no controversy with someone like that. His treatment of animals is flat out nothing any half-witted, half humane person would engage in. There is no good reason to have someone like that linger on the forum. NONE. The only reason he was banned when he was because he used multiple user names. And not because he is an animal molester. (moderators usually come to a consensus to ban someone and like everywhere, there are different opinions there as well)
Of course, no one has to read that crap. No one is holding the proverbial gun to anyone's head. But it is human nature to get caught up in the drama. Most people will begin to read something like that (because they don't what its about yet) to check it out and will have definitely have something to say. It is very difficult to get everyone together to stop responding, at least for some time until they finally give up the arduous fight.
Now, it has been said that the regular members are more rude, more hysterical than someone like Richling or some other troll or person who abuses or mistreats animals. How dare we? Is this to say that all should respect and be nice to someone who is a criminal and molester of animals? How is that possible that anyone could expect any normal, humane person to speak nicely to the worst scum of the earth? Isn't that being a little unreasonable? And to say that "you'll draw more bees with honey" is a non-issue with people with no conscience. You won't teach anyone anything by having these types of people on a forum or by being tolerant of them. All you do is support animal abuse by supporting THEM. You do support them when you allow them in your house, you in proximity to them, converse with them, pay attention to them, reinforce their agenda by attending to them.
Of course, there are milder situations where it is not known at first what the person's intentions are or what they're about. And of course, you don't rush to make conclusions or take definitive action against them. So don't bring that up again to imply that I don't recognize that fact. But there has been a rash of people coming here lately, (we have a little reprieve right now, it seems) who, it became apparent in varying amounts of time were here for one reason: to stir up, upset and disrupt the forum and for no other reason. These come in waves, I'm sure and it is not a thing of continuity or regularity. But when it comes, it ought to be dismissed as expediently as possible. Yes, it happens on most all forums. The point isn't that it doesn't. The point is that they should be eliminated in a timely fashion. These kinds of people are like a disease and will run members off who are here FOR animals, who STAND for animals and who do not want to read all about abuse. We already know it exists, don't we. We see it in all kinds of places and venues, in the media. Why do you want it shoved in your face in your own home? What good does it do? What right should they have? Personally, I take a stand against abuse. I am FOR animals. I will gladly discuss and argue any subject relevant to dogs, even if it gets heated. Controversy is fine and often interesting. But mistreatment isn't controversy.
There are many ways to perhaps, unknowingly support abuse. To allow blatant animal molesters or abusers "air time," is to support animal abuse just as it would be to allow a child molester on this board to gush forth his "opinion." Would you expect people to speak respectfully and calmly to such as that? Is animal molestation less a crime than human molestation or abuse?
Is mass producing and raising puppies in such a way as was pictured in the link I posted on my last post merely just a different opinion that we should respect and talk about with a member who is a puppy miller? Did any of you even look at it? Or are you afraid to face it, to face what you are perhaps unknowingly, even subconsciously condoning by co-habitation with people like that on this forum? If a puppy miller is allowed to brag about this practice, whatever the degree of it is, shall we remain calm, respectful and "educate" them and others who might be just "reading?" Are you really that gullible to think that education has anything to do with it?
How about someone whose dog is having seizures, bleeding from his nose and mouth, losing control of his bowel and bladder: Should we remain civil and calm, respectful as they post away on the forum, page after page of why they can not go to a vet? 10-15 pages later, a day later, they're still posting about why none of our advice will work and then jumping on us for being so "mean." And then we see them posting the same, identical post on several other forums. Shall we still trust that anything they say is even true? Oh yes, remain civil and polite, respectful of a different opinion. Lets have a healthy debate, shall we. We just need to "educate." "You draw more bees with honey."
If you think you are doing good or being moral by being respectful and polite, tolerant and welcoming of all opinions, regardless of what is being done to animals by those people with those opinions, think again. You are doing just the opposite. You are not doing good or right by animals. By allowing these things to continue, to get a foot hold here and to let that foot hold grow, is to reward abusers....inadvertently, I'm sure, but nevertheless, your are reinforcing behavior and talk of behavior which promotes and exercises abuse of animals.
What will you do if a few child molesters join and post on Fire hydrant and start spewing their opinion and discussing their details? Will you be as tolerant and allow the right to "voice" their opinion? From their point of view, they're not doing wrong. Shall we "educate" them and remain calm and not lose control and show respect for another person's opinion or a "controversial" subject?
Stop arguing that there is nothing wrong with a debate on differing opinions about various subjects. Stop using that as an argument here. Can you really not get the concept that controversy about different opinions on training methods, health care, responsible breeding isn't the issue? Trolling, animal abusers, exploitation of animals to the point of causing their demise is the issue. And yes, there most certainly have been several of those types here and some are still here, perhaps not as severe, but nonetheless, people who mistreat animals in a substantial way. Do you think it takes an architectural engineer to draw a line between what is just a different training method and mistreatment or abuse of a dog?
If you want that kind of low-life hanging out with you, you go ahead. You can either turn a blind eye, hide your head in the sand and don't look at those threads.... or you can engage in a "healthy" debate... and don't let those low lifes out-do you in polite, respectful, calm and rational discussion.