Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Can we dance nekkid??? Can I join, pretty please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaxx'sBuddy Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 pretty sure poll results speak for themselves, yes? Nope, not at all . It is simply showing the sentiments of DOL posters and not the public in general, lol. I must say that I am not all that surprised at the results, I have been reading DOL for a number of years, long before I joined so I had a pretty clear view as to the mentality around here, basically I had the day off yesterday and even though I suspected that the outcome would be as it has turned out I still felt like proceeding with the poll, at the end of the day it was fun , no regrets here and btw....I find Mr. Linke's explanation relating to his statement to be rather shallow, lol, his original statement was far from being "generic." wow damned if we do and damned if we dont but the only outcome is no matter what you are right... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Moselle: It is simply showing the sentiments of DOL posters and not the public in general, Your average member of the public would be hard put to identify more than 10 purebred dog breeds I reckon. Most wouldn't know the difference between a pitbull and a pachyderm - and the media's mislabellng of photos as 'pitbulls" doesn't help. Which strangely was the point I believe Mr Linke managed to make to most people it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) Moselle: It is simply showing the sentiments of DOL posters and not the public in general, Your average member of the public would be hard put to identify more than 10 purebred dog breeds I reckon. Most wouldn't know the difference between a pitbull and a pachyderm - and the media's mislabellng of photos as 'pitbulls" doesn't help. Which was the point I believe Mr Linke managed to make to most people it seems. Edited July 22, 2010 by poodlefan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 pretty sure poll results speak for themselves, yes? Nope, not at all . It is simply showing the sentiments of DOL posters and not the public in general, lol. I must say that I am not all that surprised at the results, I have been reading DOL for a number of years, long before I joined so I had a pretty clear view as to the mentality around here, basically I had the day off yesterday and even though I suspected that the outcome would be as it has turned out I still felt like proceeding with the poll, at the end of the day it was fun , no regrets here and btw....I find Mr. Linke's explanation relating to his statement to be rather shallow, lol, his original statement was far from being "generic." wow damned if we do and damned if we dont but the only outcome is no matter what you are right... Once again, a poster wanting to put words in my mouth. You are more than entitled to your opinion, it is not a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't". Suffice to say that if I didn't want the poster's opinion I would not have started the poll? lol. And yes, I am still of the opinion that Mr. Linke went about his statement in the wrong way, wrong choice of words, not generic at all and still very much incriminating to the staffy and the mastiff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MolassesLass Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Once again, a poster wanting to put words in my mouth. :confused: ;) Oh the irony!!!! Made my day Moselle! Gosh, what would we do without loonies in our lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Moselle:It is simply showing the sentiments of DOL posters and not the public in general, Your average member of the public would be hard put to identify more than 10 purebred dog breeds I reckon. Most wouldn't know the difference between a pitbull and a pachyderm - and the media's mislabellng of photos as 'pitbulls" doesn't help. Which strangely was the point I believe Mr Linke managed to make to most people it seems. Hi PF, as I have said before, I am of the thought that members of the public would be hard pressed to identify purebred dogs and that is the problem. It isn't fair to the pitbull to constantly have fingers pointing its direction whenever there are dog attacks and I know that most breeds of dogs are capable of attacking other dogs, it is not a trait that only the pitbull possesses (and yes I do believe that purebred pitties can be DA) I gather that Mr. Linke was trying to make people understand that the pitbull is being blamed unjustly BUT, YET AGAIN, he did very much imply that the attack on the poor maltese could have been carried out by a staffie or mastiff.....having said this, the staffie and mastiff look nothing alike as it is, lol. He could have make his point loud and clear without actually nominating other purebred dogs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Once again, a poster wanting to put words in my mouth. :confused: ;) Oh the irony!!!! Made my day Moselle! Gosh, what would we do without loonies in our lives. Loonies? OOOh, you are getting touchy, aren't you? lol. At the end of the day, you are most welcome to your opinion and if it makes you feel good to perceive me as a "looney" then I am most happy for you, whatever tinkles your fancy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 I have said all I need to say on this subject and it has now reached the stage where I am finding it monotonous, time for greener pastures, lol. I am sticking to my original thought which has remained constant throughout this poll. I respect your opinion even though it differs from mine and thank you for participating in this poll after all if I didn't value your opinion I would not have bothered in the very 1st place, to each their own, right? Oh, Mollassess, dont you think that vinegar'slass is more fitting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Hi PF, as I have said before, I am of the thought that members of the public would be hard pressed to identify purebred dogs and that is the problem. It isn't fair to the pitbull to constantly have fingers pointing its direction whenever there are dog attacks and I know that most breeds of dogs are capable of attacking other dogs, it is not a trait that only the pitbull possesses (and yes I do believe that purebred pitties can be DA) I gather that Mr. Linke was trying to make people understand that the pitbull is being blamed unjustly BUT, YET AGAIN, hedid very much imply that the attack on the poor maltese could have been carried out by a staffie or mastiff.....having said this, the staffie and mastiff look nothing alike as it is, lol. He could have make his point loud and clear without actually nominating other purebred dogs. He implied nothing of the sort. You're inferring a great deal. And once again, you've selectivey quoted him and left CROSSBREDS out of the equation.. you can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blissirritated Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Did you find it absolutely imperative to name names? Maybe he didn't? This --> "RSPCA ACT Chief executive, Michael Linke, who owns an american pit bull terrier, said it was a much maligned breed and that the dogs which attacked Harry could have been mastiffs, staffordshire bull terriers or cross breeds. that you keep repeating, isn't written as a direct quote of what Mr Linke said. It could well have been that he said that it may not have been an APBT and was asked directly by the writer whether it could have been a mastiff or staffordshire. He might have replied to that "Yes, it could have been any type of dog, even a crossbreed". Paraphrased by a writer it could end up being written "Mr Linke said the dogs could have been mastiffs, staffordshires or crossbreeds". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Hi PF, as I have said before, I am of the thought that members of the public would be hard pressed to identify purebred dogs and that is the problem. It isn't fair to the pitbull to constantly have fingers pointing its direction whenever there are dog attacks and I know that most breeds of dogs are capable of attacking other dogs, it is not a trait that only the pitbull possesses (and yes I do believe that purebred pitties can be DA) I gather that Mr. Linke was trying to make people understand that the pitbull is being blamed unjustly BUT, YET AGAIN, hedid very much imply that the attack on the poor maltese could have been carried out by a staffie or mastiff.....having said this, the staffie and mastiff look nothing alike as it is, lol. He could have make his point loud and clear without actually nominating other purebred dogs. He implied nothing of the sort. You're inferring a great deal. And once again, you've selectivey quoted him and left CROSSBREDS out of the equation.. you can't have it both ways. PF, I have made it very clear on a few occasions as to WHY I have left out the CROSSBREDS part in my argument, my post number 56 explains it quite clearly. You know what my thoughts on this subject are and that is that I am not happy that HE chose to imply THAT the STAFFIE or the MASTIFF COULD have been responsible for attacking the maltese; that is finger pointing If people of oriental descent were known to have carried out violent attacks on people but it was not known exactly what part of Asia those individuals were from and all of a sudden members of the public would wrongly point the finger at say, the chinese and a spokesperson on behalf of the chinese would come out and say....oh no, the attack could have been carried by the japanese, I am compelled to wonder what the Japanese would have to say about that I bet that would not have been considered "politically correct." GOTTA GO NOW AND GET SOME WORK DONE, CANT BE SITTING IN FRONT OF THIS MONITOR ALL DAY LONG, CYA xxx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curlybert Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I think Blissirritated summed it perfectly with her free pony analogy (post 55 in this thread). Is it really all over? Shame - it's been very entertaining! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poodlefan Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 PF, I have made it very clear on a few occasions as to WHY I have left out the CROSSBREDS part in my argument, my post number 56 explains it quite clearly. You know what my thoughts on this subject are and that is that I am not happy that HE chose to imply THAT the STAFFIE or the MASTIFF COULD have been responsible for attacking the maltese; that is finger pointing And I've repeatedly pointed out that the inference you've chosen to made from the comments isn't necessarily accurate. If, by your reasoning, Mr Linke chose to imply that CROSSBREDs could have been responsible for attacking the maltese, why don't you consider that relevant? Sorry, but I find your logic on this one unfathomable. With 50% of dogs in this country being crossbreds, that's a heap more dogs included as possible culprits than the two breeds named. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kissindra Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I think Blissirritated summed it perfectly with her free pony analogy (post 55 in this thread).Is it really all over? Shame - it's been very entertaining! abso-friggin-lutely! :p ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
casowner Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Moselle, Did you end up emailing Mr Linke for clarification today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 Moselle,Did you end up emailing Mr Linke for clarification today? No, I had other more important things to attend to. There is no urgency, this can wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 I think Blissirritated summed it perfectly with her free pony analogy (post 55 in this thread).Is it really all over? Shame - it's been very entertaining! abso-friggin-lutely! :D I couldn't agree more, I had a ball myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moselle Posted July 22, 2010 Author Share Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) Can't be bothered with some people's infantile behaviour, lol. To each their own, hey? I am not about to change my mind and that is that! You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine. This thread is a case of 'same 'ole, same 'ole' and has run its course. Edited July 22, 2010 by Moselle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kendall Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 But why did you ask for other people's opinions if you were just going to shout them done as being wrong because they differed to yours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now