Business History Books » Business Consulting Strategy » CONDITIONING THE E-COLLAR-Give us a straight answer, FRAUDDIE
CONDITIONING THE E-COLLAR-Give us a straight answer, FRAUDDIE
Question:
>Robin, haven’t you seen Dogman’s updated troll page?
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! ROTFLMAO!!! I have nowe! Robin
Response:
>>He has been >raising and training champion retreivers for 40 years. >But "close" to four decades, you bet.
The difference being that Dogman actually has something to show for all those years of training. Something Jer would nowe nothing about. >Marines, yes. Hero, no way. >The heroes were the ones who didn’t make it back home.
To them anyone who wasn’t at home hiding under the bed was a hero. >What part about having 7 kids in 57 years amazes you, Crim? >The part about actually getting a woman pregnant? >Or the part about having sex that often?
If Crim and Howe were to pool their experiences, they’d still be a couple short. >Anyway, there’s a chance for you to make a quick $6000, Crim, all you >have to do now is PUT UP, eh?
Robin
Response:
[...] >We actually understand a great deal about how to motivate >a retriever to hunt, and to do many other things. If by >"burning a hunting dog to make him hunt" you are referring >to what we call "the Escalon shuffle," no, I do not use >that method and I reject it in general.
You even have to take a shot at Rex Carr, eh? What’s wrong with you, Dahl? What is it exactly that you reject? Do you think Jerry Howe knows what you meant by "Escalon shuffle"? You use the *e-collar* yourself, you advocate *Koehler,* yet you still want to come off as some kind of touchy-feely PPer! Geeeeeeez. — Dogman http://www.i1.net/~dogman For everything you’ve ever wanted to know about Jerry Howe and our other trolls and scumbags, visit Troll Central: http://www.i1.net/~dogman/trolls.html ABCNEWS – Nicholas Regush Columns http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/living/secondopinion/secondopinio… "There’s them that don’t know, and you can’t tell ‘em." Louis Armstrong
Response:
> Nice going, Frosty. > Now, perhaps you can answer the question about the necessity for CONDITIONING the dog to the collar, in > order that it be effective for long term training purposes?
Conditioning to the collar is done so that it may be used most effectively as a training aid, without introducing fear or confusion into the process. "Long term training" as I understand it requires time and repetition. The various actions must not only be taught, but practiced until correct behavior is habit and various unwanted behaviors have been forgotten. When that happens, the desired behavior is pretty reliable. At the most advanced level of retrieving, daily maintenance is needed to keep the dog working at his or her best. This does not mean the dog needs to be corrected, though. I remember Banjo (FC Banjo XXXVI) never wore the e-collar in training, during the three years or so I knew her (she was already advanced in her training by then). > Or, do the collar manufacturers recommend the NECESSITY of conditioning the dog to the collar, just so > they can rip everyone off by selling you people a NEEDLESS DUMMY collar?
Properly conditioning a dog to the collar, on the one hand, and dummy collars, on the other, are two separate topics. Collar-conditioning is very important, IMO. I’m not sure what that has to do with a dummy collar. > We’ve got people using incorrect methods for snake proofing and teaching the come command, and none of > it will work without the collar CONSTANTLY being on the dog, except for the couple of minutes the dog is > in the trial…
If it does not work without the collar being on the dog, it is not being done properly, IMO. But, as I said before, my use of the collar does not make me responsible for everyone else’s use or misuse of it. > Seems like it doesn’t matter much to you, does it? We didn’t hear from you or anyone else, when I > brought the facts to light in the thread by webweave, as she gleefully described howe her dog Moon > flipped in the air, ass over bucket, when he got burned. That lady thinks her dog is snake proof. He > might be, but only if he’s wearing a shock collar…
I have no experience with snakeproofing so am not qualified to criticize the procedure. Our approach to snakes is to run the coon dogs only after it gets cold in the fall, and train the retrievers only in areas which see frequent enough use to keep the moccasins away. > Then maybe you can address the issue of competent trainers not being competent enough to be able to > train a hunting dog to do the most natural thing in their world, hunting, without the need to brutalize > and shock them?
This is your fantasy; I don’t feel a need to address it. > There seems to be something that doesn’t fit here… If the "experts" were truly expert, they wouldn’t > be burning a hunting dog to make him hunt, would they? They’d understand howe to properly motivate and > train the dog using far more effective, faster, intelligent, humane, methods. I think you lack some > common sense and human decency, in your zeal to control and force the most natural thing in the world, > for a Retrieve dog.
We actually understand a great deal about how to motivate a retriever to hunt, and to do many other things. If by "burning a hunting dog to make him hunt" you are referring to what we call "the Escalon shuffle," no, I do not use that method and I reject it in general. > Perhaps the "experts" you mention, including you and your husband, are not any more expert than our own > resident fraud die??? Lets face it, anyone that can write an article that details the kind of punishment > and abuse you recommend for training hunting dog, is not intelligent enough to be an expert, in anything > except torture.
Jerry, I’d love to see any of the FC retrievers you have trained. Or even a lowly MH, for that matter–bet you couldn’t do it, even if you secretly resorted to the e-collar. > If cavemen had ecollars, we wouldn’t have dogs, would we? > Have a nice day!
You, too. And thanks for the entertainment. — Amy Frost Dahl Retriever Training phone: (910) 295-6710 Pinehurst, NC 28370 (http://www.oakhillkennel.com)
Response:
>OTOH, if he has been at this as long as he claims, then >surely he’s quite old by now??
Robin, haven’t you seen Dogman’s updated troll page? http://www.i1.net/~dogman/trolls.html –Matt
Response:
Jerry wonders: >Go ahead, ask them if conditioning the collar is >not necessary.
We are all in agreement that ‘conditioning’ the collar is necessary for alot of things. I’m telling you that just putting the collar on the dog, without turning it on, or having the dog understand what to do when it IS turned on, will do absolutely nothing. You seem to think that the ecollar is like your stupid doggy-do-right, and everything under the sun just magically disappears when a dog is exposed to it. In fact, you seem to think that’s the way training works in general. That’s what makes you a bleacher screamer Jer. FRED HASSEN "SIT MEANS SIT" Internet obedience talkshow can be found at: http://www.lovemypets.com/sitmeanssit Trainer/Owner–1999 N.A.P.D.(Open) National Champion "Obedience" 1999 N.A.P.D. (Open) National Champion "Protection" All-time high obedience score record holder for N.A.P.D. competitions Monthly articles appear in Dog Sports Magazine www.dogsports.com Monthly column appears at www.tritronics.com (click on "Pet,Vet,Obedience"— then click to "monthly columns," then to "Fred Hassen")
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >OTOH, if he has been at this as long as he claims, then surely he’s quite old >by now?? I mean, he didn’t become a dog trainer until *after* he finished vo – >tech. Howe else would he have known what components to put in his little black >box?? Forget the fat guy in the bleachers, scenario. I think Jer’s some really >old, bitter guy sitting in the back room of a television "fix it" shop. His >mommy probably loved the family dog more than she did him and that’s how he >became fixated on the canine species. >Robin
Wow! If you think that’s funny, how about Dogman? According to him: He has been raising prize Apaloosa horses for 40 years. He has been raising and training champion retreivers for 40 years. He was a war hero in the marines as a sniper for 4-6 years. He went to the finest colleges to be a financial guru for at least 4-6 years. He became a self-professed expert on virology and the truth about AIDS. He fathered and raised 7 children, and had a successful career as a banker. And yet he’s only 56 years old. Is somebody fibbing to you? Is it Jerry or is it Dogman? Howe can you tell?
Response:
Jerry puzzled asks: >Oh really?
Yes, really. > Did they consult you?
I’m in contact with them on a regular basis. In fact, I just told them the other day that they are going to need to put about 7 extra holes in the collar straps for smaller dogs. When you see that out shortly, you know where it came from. Quite a few other things also, and this is an ongoing process from the ‘pro staff’ at Tri-Tronics. Collar manufacturers manufacture collars, ecollar "pro-staff" trainers provide the training input, and bleacher screamers have their beers and yell. We all have our place. >Or perhaps someone you know?
Now your getting it Jer. Yes, Alice Woodyard is a trainer, and helped write the Tri-Tronics training book. Mike Lardy and quite a few others as well. > Or perhaps some famous field dog trainer like >dogman?
Jer, you are really shaping up now——I’m proud of you. Yes, Yes, there are quite a few field trial trainers on the ‘Pro Staff’. You are welcome to go to Tri-Tronics website, and they actually list the Pro-Staff people and their qualifications Jer. I figured that sooner or later you’d figure out how Tri-Tronics stays the top ecollar manufacturer. Jer, now this one is really going to get you so sit down—-O.K.??? Guess who does their ‘Training’ videos??? That’s right Jer——Professional Dog trainers!!!!!! Boy, and you were ready to say the ‘manufacturers’ weren’t ya Jer?? Although everyone’s methods differ some, I’m sure most of the people would agree with quite a bit of what ‘Dogman’ has to say, and probably pretty close to nothing of what you offer. That’s just my opinion though Jer. >Or perhaps you heard a rumor that they were >consulting trainers?
There you go back to your 30 years ago references to ecollars Jer. This is 1999, and has been going on for quite a few years now. I see you are quite knowledgeable Jer. > I don’t think the collar manufacturers consulted >anyone other that their behaviorists…
Yes Jer, I see you are just a fountain of information. I think we’ve covered this already. FRED HASSEN "SIT MEANS SIT" Internet obedience talkshow can be found at: http://www.lovemypets.com/sitmeanssit Trainer/Owner–1999 N.A.P.D.(Open) National Champion "Obedience" 1999 N.A.P.D. (Open) National Champion "Protection" All-time high obedience score record holder for N.A.P.D. competitions Monthly articles appear in Dog Sports Magazine www.dogsports.com Monthly column appears at www.tritronics.com (click on "Pet,Vet,Obedience"— then click to "monthly columns," then to "Fred Hassen")
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->OTOH, if he has been at this as long as he claims, then surely he’s >quite old >by now?? I mean, he didn’t become a dog trainer until *after* he >finished vo – >tech. Howe else would he have known what components to put in his >little black >box?? Forget the fat guy in the bleachers, scenario. I think Jer’s >some really >old, bitter guy sitting in the back room of a television "fix it" >shop. His >mommy probably loved the family dog more than she did him and that’s >how he >became fixated on the canine species. >Robin >Wow! If you think that’s funny, how about Dogman?
What’s funny about it, Crim? > According to him: >He has been raising prize Apaloosa horses for 40 years.
I’ll write you a check for $1000 (and personally deliver it to you) if you can find anywhere that I’ve ever said that. >He has been >raising and training champion retreivers for 40 years.
I’ll write you another check for $1000 if you can find anywhere that I’ve ever said that. But "close" to four decades, you bet. >He was a war >hero in the marines as a sniper for 4-6 years.
I’ll write you another check for $1000 if you can find anywhere that I’ve ever said that. Marines, yes. Hero, no way. The heroes were the ones who didn’t make it back home. >He went to the finest >colleges to be a financial guru for at least 4-6 years.
I’ll write you another check for $1000 if you can find anywhere that I’ve ever said that. But UC-Berkeley is a pretty damn good school, eh? >He became a self-professed expert on virology and the truth about AIDS.
I’ll write you another check for $1000 if you can find anywhere that I’ve ever said that. >He fathered and raised 7 children,
You finally got one right. Hip hip HOORAY! >and had a successful career as a >banker.
I’ll write you a check for $1000 if you can ever find anywhere that I’ve ever said that. >And yet he’s only 56 years old.
57 — but close. What part about having 7 kids in 57 years amazes you, Crim? The part about actually getting a woman pregnant? Or the part about having sex that often? I can’t help it if your own wife, Suzanne Schwartz Esq., finds you too repulsive to actually have sex with, eh? Maybe it’s that shabby pony-tail of yours, eh? Anyway, there’s a chance for you to make a quick $6000, Crim, all you have to do now is PUT UP, eh? ;>) — Dogman http://www.i1.net/~dogman For everything you’ve ever wanted to know about Jerry Howe and our other trolls and scumbags, visit Troll Central: http://www.i1.net/~dogman/trolls.html ABCNEWS – Nicholas Regush Columns http://more.abcnews.go.com/sections/living/secondopinion/secondopinio… "There’s them that don’t know, and you can’t tell ‘em." Louis Armstrong
Response:
>>> 4. Conspiracies abound. If everyone is against you, the reason can’t >> *possibly* be that you are a sh**head. There’s obviously a conspiracy >> against you, and you’ll be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it. >Now who does THIS one remind you of, hmmmm? <G>
LOL! I would just be happy if our resident sh*thead would stop using the phrase "three dozen years" in every freakin post he writes. It frustrates me for him that in "three dozen years" he apparently has achieved NOTHING other than a flair for tapping his feet and flapping his gums. OTOH, if he has been at this as long as he claims, then surely he’s quite old by now?? I mean, he didn’t become a dog trainer until *after* he finished vo – tech. Howe else would he have known what components to put in his little black box?? Forget the fat guy in the bleachers, scenario. I think Jer’s some really old, bitter guy sitting in the back room of a television "fix it" shop. His mommy probably loved the family dog more than she did him and that’s how he became fixated on the canine species. Robin
Response:
Nice going, Frosty. Now, perhaps you can answer the question about the necessity for CONDITIONING the dog to the collar, in order that it be effective for long term training purposes? Or, do the collar manufacturers recommend the NECESSITY of conditioning the dog to the collar, just so they can rip everyone off by selling you people a NEEDLESS DUMMY collar? We’ve got people using incorrect methods for snake proofing and teaching the come command, and none of it will work without the collar CONSTANTLY being on the dog, except for the couple of minutes the dog is in the trial… Seems like it doesn’t matter much to you, does it? We didn’t hear from you or anyone else, when I brought the facts to light in the thread by webweave, as she gleefully described howe her dog Moon flipped in the air, ass over bucket, when he got burned. That lady thinks her dog is snake proof. He might be, but only if he’s wearing a shock collar… Then maybe you can address the issue of competent trainers not being competent enough to be able to train a hunting dog to do the most natural thing in their world, hunting, without the need to brutalize and shock them? There seems to be something that doesn’t fit here… If the "experts" were truly expert, they wouldn’t be burning a hunting dog to make him hunt, would they? They’d understand howe to properly motivate and train the dog using far more effective, faster, intelligent, humane, methods. I think you lack some common sense and human decency, in your zeal to control and force the most natural thing in the world, for a Retrieve dog. Perhaps the "experts" you mention, including you and your husband, are not any more expert than our own resident fraud die??? Lets face it, anyone that can write an article that details the kind of punishment and abuse you recommend for training hunting dog, is not intelligent enough to be an expert, in anything except torture. If cavemen had ecollars, we wouldn’t have dogs, would we? Have a nice day! Oh, and if anyone reading has not just eaten a big meal, and has a strong constitution (because you might blow lunch), take a look at where our Frosty is coming from… It’s all here in her and her husbands own words. I suggest you carefully and completely read the entire two pages, it will enlighten you and give you some food for thought… if you can think of eating for a couple of days after reading this trash… http://www.oakhillkennel.com/library/force/force1.html http://www.oakhillkennel.com/library/force/force2.html 
DRAINING THE SWAMP, AND RELOCATING THE GATORS… J>>> "CUSTOM WILL RECONCILE PEOPLE TO ANY ATROCITY." G.B. Shaw. "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." Leo Tolstoy Is it any wonder that the following sig file has generated more complaints to my personal email than any other controversial post I have made to date, bar none?: caveat If you have to do things to your dog to train him, that you would rather not have to do, then you shouldn’t be doing them. If you have a dog trainer that tells you to jerk your dog around, choke him, pinch his ears, or twist his toes, shock, shake, slap, scold, hit, or punish him in any manner, that corrections are appropriate, that the dog won’t think of you as the punisher, or that corrections are not harmful, or if they can’t train your dog to do what you want, look for a trainer that knows Howe. Sincerely, Jerry Howe, Wits’ End Dog Training http://www.doggydoright.com Nature, to be mastered, must be obeyed. -Francis Bacon- There are terrible people who, instead of solving a problem, bungle it and make it more difficult for all who come after. Who ever can’t hit the nail on the head should, please, not hit at all. -Nietzsche- The abilities to think, rationalize and solve problems are learned qualities. The Wits’ End Dog Training Method challenges the learning centers in the dogs brain. These centers, once challenged, develop and continue to grow exponentially, to make him smarter. The Wits’ End Dog Training method capitalizes on praising split seconds of canine thought, strategy, and timing, not mindless hours of forced repetition, constant corrections, and scolding. -Jerry Howe-
Response:
Nice going, Frosty. Now, perhaps you can answer the question about the necessity for CONDITIONING the dog to the collar, in order that it be effective for training purposes. Or, do the collar manufacturers recommend conditioning the dog to the collar, just so they can rip everyone off by selling you people a NEEDLESS DUMMY collar? We’ve got people using incorrect methods for snake proofing and teaching the come command, and none of it will work without the collar CONSTANTLY being on the dog, except for the couple of minutes the dog is in the trial… Then maybe you can address the issue of competent trainers not being competent enough to be able to train a hunting dog to do the most natural thing in their world, hunting, without the need to brutalize and shock them? There seems to be something that doesn’t fit here… If the "experts" were truly expert, they wouldn’t be burning a hunting dog to make him hunt, would they? They’d understand howe to properly motivate and train the dog using far more effective, faster, intelligent, humane methods. If cavemen had ecollars, we wouldn’t have dogs. Have a nice day!
Response:
Well, I admit that I disclaim responsibility for everything everyone everywhere does with e-collars. Yes, Tri-Tronics has consulted me for feedback. Yes, I am personally acquainted with other trainers they have consulted. Rex Carr was one of their main sources. I have not met him but John (my husband and training partner) knows him. They designed collars to Rex’s specifications. Tri-Tronics employed Jim & Phyllis Dobbs and Alice Woodyard to work with the various models of e-collars and develop methods of training dogs with them. A lot of novice trainers use these methods today; the top competitive trainers tend to use a different approach, derived from Rex’s work. Jim, Phyllis, and Alice are dog trainers, not behaviorists, not electrical engineers. IMO, other manufacturers don’t count. John and I have messed around with their collars and most are unreliable, lack range, and/or are poorly designed for retriever training. One new company makes a collar which does not fit a large retriever and does not activate in the water. I have never heard of anyone other than Jerry who relies on elves, and nobody with greater scientific background than an undergrad degree from a military academy, for technical design and engineering. Some of Jerry’s questions don’t make sense, but I think this may address them: I believe effective and humane use of the e-collar must be within the context of a structured, step-by-step training program where the collar is introduced carefully so as to prevent any fear or confusion. Does everybody use it that way? No. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > Hello, Frosty, > Jerry Howe probably isn’t interested in facts, but in case > anyone else is following this: > I kind of do like facts, being as this is my business, not a game or hobby with me. And I > especially like these facts, since these facts here, are going to show that we’ve got some not too > expert "experts" here in rpdb… > Collar manufactureres design and make collars. Their > expertise is mainly in electronics and materials. > So, where do the get their information from, Elves??? > Dog trainers train dogs. > That’s been my experience for three dozen years. What’s your bag? > The history of the e-collar > involves plenty of communication between the manufacturers > and the trainers. > Oh really? Did they consult you? Or perhaps someone you know? Or perhaps some famous field dog > trainer like dogman? Or perhaps you heard a rumor that they were consulting trainers? > I don’t think the collar manufacturers consulted anyone other that their behaviorists… > The trainers found ways to use remotely > activated shock collars constructively in training, told > the collar manufacturers what they wanted, etc., etc. > Not quite, sweetheart… > Today it is still true that the e-collar manufacturers > know more about electronics than most dog trainers, and > the better dog trainers know more about dog training > than the e-collar manufacturers. > You mean the behaviorists that work with the ecollar manufacturers do not earn their keep? That’s > silly, isn’t it? > The FACTS are, that the better trainers KNOW BETTER than to use ecollars. > And the "expert" trainers here on rpdb, know more about Chinese, than they do dog training. > The mfrs get their > info about dog training from the trainers, not the > other way around. > Wrong. The manufacturers get their information from behaviorists at universities. > Kind of like Fred’s tennis-racket example. > I know fred is in some sort of racket, because he sure isn’t much of a dog trainer… > But as long as you are so interested in the subject, and being that you are an ecollar user, are > you aware of the necessity for conditioning the dogs to the collar prior to, and after abuse with > it? Hmmm??? > What do you say? Huh? Tell us that dog’s don’t need to be conditioned to the collar, or that the > manufacturers do not warn about misusing the collar by not conditioning the dog. > Perhaps you’d like to tell us why the manufacturers sell DUMMY COLLARS? > You think they are double dipping? You think they are ripping us off? Somebody’s getting ripped > off. The rip off happens when idiots train using the ecollar and not pre conditioning their dogs > before snake proofing, or teaching the COME command, or anything else, that we would want our dogs > to do, without having the collar on them. > Perhaps I’m wrong? Straighten us all out, Frosty… Because we’ve got people here, that are > lousing their dogs up, counting on training them to come, or to be snake proof, and you guys don’t > seem to know anything about it. And neither do the dogs, unless they are wearing the ecollar. > That’s the way it works. > I guess we’ll just say that Llama spit happened to you guys, kind of all at once, huh? > > What is your defense to not advising those people interested > > in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER > > BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for > > conditioning the collar? > — > Amy Frost Dahl Retriever Training phone: (910) 295-6710 > Pinehurst, NC 28370 (http://www.oakhillkennel.com) > DRAINING THE SWAMP, AND RELOCATING THE GATORS… J>>> > "CUSTOM WILL RECONCILE PEOPLE TO ANY ATROCITY." G.B. Shaw. > "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the > greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious > truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which > they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, proudly taught to others, > and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their > lives." > Leo Tolstoy > Is it any wonder that the following sig file has generated more > complaints to my personal email than any other controversial post I have > made to date, bar none?: > caveat > If you have to do things to your dog to train him, that you would > rather not have to do, then you shouldn’t be doing them. If you > have a dog trainer that tells you to jerk your dog around, choke him, > pinch his ears, or twist his toes, shock, shake, slap, scold, hit, or > punish him in any manner, that corrections are appropriate, that the > dog won’t think of you as the punisher, or that corrections are not > harmful, or if they can’t train your dog to do what you want, look for a > trainer that knows Howe. > Sincerely, > Jerry Howe, > Wits’ End Dog Training > http://www.doggydoright.com > Nature, to be mastered, must be obeyed. > -Francis Bacon- > There are terrible people who, instead of solving a problem, > bungle it and make it more difficult for all who come after. Who > ever can’t hit the nail on the head should, please, not hit at all. > -Nietzsche- > The abilities to think, rationalize and solve problems are learned > qualities. > The Wits’ End Dog Training Method challenges the learning > centers in the dogs brain. These centers, once challenged, develop > and continue to grow exponentially, to make him smarter. > The Wits’ End Dog Training method capitalizes on praising split > seconds of canine thought, strategy, and timing, not mindless hours of > forced repetition, constant corrections, and scolding. > -Jerry Howe-
– Amy Frost Dahl Retriever Training phone: (910) 295-6710 Pinehurst, NC 28370 (http://www.oakhillkennel.com)
Response:
> Wrong. The manufacturers get their information from behaviorists at universities.
Like the Dobbs’? Name one of these behaviorists. Lynn K.
Response:
Thanks for the attribution, Denna, but Bob Wells wrote it, not I. Richard – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> 4. Conspiracies abound. If everyone is against you, the reason can’t >> *possibly* be that you are a sh**head. There’s obviously a conspiracy >> against you, and you’ll be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it. > Now who does THIS one remind you of, hmmmm? <G> > Denna > See pointless pics of my art and pets > http://www.picantes.com/windwolf > Also see the real pitbull > http://www.picantes.com/pitbull > ***** > Remove references to flourescent pink pseudo-meat before replying
Response:
> > Wrong. The manufacturers get their information from behaviorists at universities. > Like the Dobbs’? Name one of these behaviorists. > Lynn K.
Good. Why don’t you ask them to confront me with the mistaken advice I give here? They are ecollar trainers, I’m sure they’d be happy to give us their input. Go ahead, ask them if conditioning the collar is not necessary. Tell them they’ve got a wise guy here that needs to be knocked down a peg or two.. J>
Response:
ZZZZZZZZZttttt…..pop pop pop pop pop pop There goes the back-up irony meter as well…. To Fred…… >>>Your ridiculous sig file does not address the question…
Response:
>> 4. Conspiracies abound. If everyone is against you, the reason can’t > *possibly* be that you are a sh**head. There’s obviously a conspiracy > against you, and you’ll be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it.
Now who does THIS one remind you of, hmmmm? <G> Denna See pointless pics of my art and pets http://www.picantes.com/windwolf Also see the real pitbull http://www.picantes.com/pitbull ***** Remove references to flourescent pink pseudo-meat before replying
Response:
Jerry Howe probably isn’t interested in facts, but in case anyone else is following this: Collar manufactureres design and make collars. Their expertise is mainly in electronics and materials. Dog trainers train dogs. The history of the e-collar involves plenty of communication between the manufacturers and the trainers. The trainers found ways to use remotely activated shock collars constructively in training, told the collar manufacturers what they wanted, etc., etc. Today it is still true that the e-collar manufacturers know more about electronics than most dog trainers, and the better dog trainers know more about dog training than the e-collar manufacturers. The mfrs get their info about dog training from the trainers, not the other way around. Kind of like Fred’s tennis-racket example. > What is your defense to not advising those people interested > in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER > BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for > conditioning the collar?
– Amy Frost Dahl Retriever Training phone: (910) 295-6710 Pinehurst, NC 28370 (http://www.oakhillkennel.com)
Response:
Hello, Frosty, > Jerry Howe probably isn’t interested in facts, but in case > anyone else is following this:
I kind of do like facts, being as this is my business, not a game or hobby with me. And I especially like these facts, since these facts here, are going to show that we’ve got some not too expert "experts" here in rpdb… > Collar manufactureres design and make collars. Their > expertise is mainly in electronics and materials.
So, where do the get their information from, Elves??? > Dog trainers train dogs.
That’s been my experience for three dozen years. What’s your bag? > The history of the e-collar > involves plenty of communication between the manufacturers > and the trainers.
Oh really? Did they consult you? Or perhaps someone you know? Or perhaps some famous field dog trainer like dogman? Or perhaps you heard a rumor that they were consulting trainers? I don’t think the collar manufacturers consulted anyone other that their behaviorists… > The trainers found ways to use remotely > activated shock collars constructively in training, told > the collar manufacturers what they wanted, etc., etc.
Not quite, sweetheart… > Today it is still true that the e-collar manufacturers > know more about electronics than most dog trainers, and > the better dog trainers know more about dog training > than the e-collar manufacturers.
You mean the behaviorists that work with the ecollar manufacturers do not earn their keep? That’s silly, isn’t it? The FACTS are, that the better trainers KNOW BETTER than to use ecollars. And the "expert" trainers here on rpdb, know more about Chinese, than they do dog training. > The mfrs get their > info about dog training from the trainers, not the > other way around.
Wrong. The manufacturers get their information from behaviorists at universities. > Kind of like Fred’s tennis-racket example.
I know fred is in some sort of racket, because he sure isn’t much of a dog trainer… But as long as you are so interested in the subject, and being that you are an ecollar user, are you aware of the necessity for conditioning the dogs to the collar prior to, and after abuse with it? Hmmm??? What do you say? Huh? Tell us that dog’s don’t need to be conditioned to the collar, or that the manufacturers do not warn about misusing the collar by not conditioning the dog. Perhaps you’d like to tell us why the manufacturers sell DUMMY COLLARS? You think they are double dipping? You think they are ripping us off? Somebody’s getting ripped off. The rip off happens when idiots train using the ecollar and not pre conditioning their dogs before snake proofing, or teaching the COME command, or anything else, that we would want our dogs to do, without having the collar on them. Perhaps I’m wrong? Straighten us all out, Frosty… Because we’ve got people here, that are lousing their dogs up, counting on training them to come, or to be snake proof, and you guys don’t seem to know anything about it. And neither do the dogs, unless they are wearing the ecollar. That’s the way it works. I guess we’ll just say that Llama spit happened to you guys, kind of all at once, huh? > What is your defense to not advising those people interested > in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER > BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for > conditioning the collar? > — > Amy Frost Dahl Retriever Training phone: (910) 295-6710 > Pinehurst, NC 28370 (http://www.oakhillkennel.com)
DRAINING THE SWAMP, AND RELOCATING THE GATORS… J>>> "CUSTOM WILL RECONCILE PEOPLE TO ANY ATROCITY." G.B. Shaw. "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." Leo Tolstoy Is it any wonder that the following sig file has generated more complaints to my personal email than any other controversial post I have made to date, bar none?: caveat If you have to do things to your dog to train him, that you would rather not have to do, then you shouldn’t be doing them. If you have a dog trainer that tells you to jerk your dog around, choke him, pinch his ears, or twist his toes, shock, shake, slap, scold, hit, or punish him in any manner, that corrections are appropriate, that the dog won’t think of you as the punisher, or that corrections are not harmful, or if they can’t train your dog to do what you want, look for a trainer that knows Howe. Sincerely, Jerry Howe, Wits’ End Dog Training http://www.doggydoright.com Nature, to be mastered, must be obeyed. -Francis Bacon- There are terrible people who, instead of solving a problem, bungle it and make it more difficult for all who come after. Who ever can’t hit the nail on the head should, please, not hit at all. -Nietzsche- The abilities to think, rationalize and solve problems are learned qualities. The Wits’ End Dog Training Method challenges the learning centers in the dogs brain. These centers, once challenged, develop and continue to grow exponentially, to make him smarter. The Wits’ End Dog Training method capitalizes on praising split seconds of canine thought, strategy, and timing, not mindless hours of forced repetition, constant corrections, and scolding. -Jerry Howe-
Response:
That’s truly funny, Bob. This should be required reading on all newsgroups. I found 2,11, and 12 similar. Richard – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The Twelve Commandments of Flaming > 1. Make things up about your opponent. It is important to make your lies > sound true. Preface your argument with the word clearly. "Clearly, Fred > Flooney is a liar, and a dirtball to boot." > 2. Be an armchair psychologist. Youre a smart person. You’ve heard of > Freud. You took a psychology course in college. Clearly, you’re > qualified to psychoanalyze your opponent. "Polly Purebread, by using the > word zucchini in her posting, shows she has a bad case of penis envy." > 3. Cross-post your flames. Everyone on the net is just waiting for the > next literary masterpiece to leave your terminal! From the Apple II > RoundTable to X-10 Powerhouse RoundTable, they are all holding their > breath until your next flame. Therefore, post everywhere. > 4. Conspiracies abound. If everyone is against you, the reason can’t > *possibly* be that you are a sh**head. There’s obviously a conspiracy > against you, and you’ll be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it. > 5. Lawsuit threats. This is the reverse of Rule #4 (sort of like the Yin > & Yang of Flaming). Threatening a lawsuit is always considered to be in > good form. "By saying that I’ve posted to the wrong group, Bertha has > libeled me, slandered me, and sodomized me. See you in court, Bertha." > 6. Force them to document their claims. Even if Harry Hoinkus states > outright that he likes tomato sauce on his pasta, you should demand > documentation. If Newsweek hasn’t written an article on Harry’s pasta > preferences, then Harry’s obviously lying. > 7. Use foreign phrases. French is good, but Latin is the lingua franca > of Flaming. You should use the words "ad hominem" at least three times > per article. Other favorite Latin phrases are "ad nauseum","veni, vidi, > vici", and fetuccini alfredo (unless you’re Harry Hoinkus). > 8. Tell em how smart you are. Why use intelligent arguments to convince > them you’re smart when all you have to do is tell them? State that you’re > a member of Mensa, or Mega, or Dorks of America. Tell them the scores you > received on every exam since high school. "I got an 800 on my SATs, GREs, > MCATs, and I can also spell the word premeiotic." > 9. Accuse your opponent of censorship. It is your right as an American > citizen to post whatever the hell you want to the net (as guaranteed by > the 37th Amendment, I think). Anyone who tries to limit your > cross-posting or move a flame ware to e-mail is either a communist, a > fascist, or both. > 10. Doubt their existence. You’ve never actually seen your opponent, > have you? And since you’re the center of the universe, you should have > seen them by now, shouldn’t you? Therefore, THEY DON’T EXIST! this is > the beauty of flamers’ logic. > 11. Lie, cheat, steal, leave the toilet seat up! > 12. When in doubt, INSULT. If you forget the other 11 rules, remember > this one. At some point during your wonderful career as a Flamer you will > undoubtedly end up in a flame war with someone who is better than you. > This person will expose your lies, tear apart your arguments, make you > look generally like a bozo. At this point, there is only one thing to do; > INSULT THE DIRTBAG!! "Oh yeah? Well, your mother does strange things > with vegetables." > I hope this helps you guys work things out! > ;~) > Bob >Hello Frantik Fraud Die, >> Jerry the bleacher screamer rants: >> >Just stick to the point, the issue was >> >conditioning the ecollar. >> Yes, I do it every day. Any questions on my success of it, >> please see >> signature file below. >Let’s look a little deeper, shall we, Fred??? Because I’m >telling you, you are doing it incorrectly, as you did with >cindi’s dog. >> >You seem to forget all about it. You seem to >> >make stupid excuses for not doing what you >are supposed >> to. >> Please see signature file below, to see the results that can >> be attained >> doing what I do. >Good for you. HOWE about some STRAIGHT freaking answers??? >Howe come you don’t address conditioning the ecollar in the >snake proofing threads? Didn’t you notice that people are >INCORRECTLY and IMPROPERLY snake proofing their dogs, without >proper prior conditioning of the ecollar according to the >MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS? >Howe come you don’t speak up, being the expert you are? I’ve >pointed out, that the snake proofing will not be effective >AFTER THE "TRAINING," without the collar being worn, if the >dog has not been PROPERLY conditioned to it, prior to, and >after abuse? >What gives? Did you miss those threads, Fred??? >Let’s have a straight answer, eh fraud die? >The collar is supposed to be conditioned to the dog both >before and after use, for a significant period of time. >You are avoiding the question, that’s why I’m sending this as >a new message, eh FRED? >Your ridiculous sig file does not address the question… The >question is, HOWE come you do not address proper conditioning >of the ecollar prior to use in snake proofing, or ANY other >training problem??? Like when cindi visited and got her dog >burned for an hour or so? Remember? That dog had no prior >conditioning, and never did accomplish a reliable recall… >and showed signs of nervousness afterward… >You are the "pro" that I’m interested in EXPOSING as a FRAUD, >and IGNORAMUS. >What is your defense to not understanding or using the >conditioning that is >explicitly specified by the manufacturer of the product that >you misuse? >What is your defense to not advising those people interested >in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER >BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for >conditioning the collar? >Don’t forget, those people that attend a "snake proofing >event," such as web weave enjoyed with her dog as he screamed >and FLIPPED IN THE AIR, ass over bucket, when he got burned, >are not regular ecollar users, they borrow the device at the >event… And you don’t even think of mentioning it??? >HOWE about it, FRAUD DIE? >Are you content to see people improperly snake proof their >dogs, and believe they are protected? It seems that way to >everybody watching, doesn’t it? Better come up with something >fast… >You have no excuse, except that you are an idiot. You could >just say that you don’t care that lots of people are >INEFFECTIVELY "snake proofing" their dogs… That too, would >be consistent with you and your kind. >The dog, in order to work without the E-collar, must be >properly conditioned to it, prior to and after abuse. It is in >the owner’s manual from the ecollar manufacturers. The >manufacturer is aware of the difficulties that will happen if >the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. >The collar is necessarily supposed to be worn for a period of >time prior to abusing the dog with it. And, it should remain >on the dog for a period of time after the abuse. >Otherwise, the collar will be associated ONLY with the >problem, and the dog will ONLY respond to the problem, ONLY if >the collar is being worn. Without the proper PREREQUISITE >conditioning, all the snake proofing that webweave and >lyinglynn and the other morons here, often like to see >committed against their dogs, goes right down the crapper. >That is why they sell a DUMMY collar, so the dog doesn’t break >the piece of crap during the couple of weeks it’s NEEDED>. >Howe about that??? >Why ELSE would the mfg. have the instructions in their manual? >It’s probably on the >first page after sparking the damn thing up. Is it for idiots >like you to ignore and do as they please? >The manufacturer is fully aware of the difficulties that will >happen if the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. >That is why they took the trouble to include the instructions >for conditioning in the owner’s manual. >Why would the manufacturers have the instructions in their >manual? Why would they sell a DUMMY collar, specifically for >that purpose? Is there no point in following the instructions >from the manufacturer? >Are the ecollar manufacturers perpetrating a fraud, when they >sell the DUMMY collar specifically for that purpose? >That’ll be rich, you telling us, that the manufacturers sell >the dummy collar, just to rip us off, eh FRED??? >What the hell is wrong with you??? >There is no point in using common sense with you, you are an >incompetent trainer but an excellent fraud. >There is no point in examining the issue, you are hiding >behind misdirection and deception, as you often try to do… >People see right through you, freddie. It’s just like it was >when your were being a weasel in school. Everybody knows… >There is no point in discussing this with you, unless you are >willing to accept and ADMIT the TRUTH… >FAT CHANCE!!! >I have proven my point. I have shown you and the others that >approve of burning dogs to teach them things, that you are >doing it INCORRECTLY and INEFFECTIVELY… >Your statement that aversives must be CONSTANTLY repeated >further proves my point. >Now, as for YOUR FAVORITE statement, that reinforcement never >ends, that part is true. >Here’s WHY! When fear, force, and punishment are used for >training, the training will only be effective if the fear, >force, or abuser are present. >You are welcome to have your pals at tritronics discuss this >with me here on
… read more »
Response:
The Twelve Commandments of Flaming 1. Make things up about your opponent. It is important to make your lies sound true. Preface your argument with the word clearly. "Clearly, Fred Flooney is a liar, and a dirtball to boot." 2. Be an armchair psychologist. Youre a smart person. You’ve heard of Freud. You took a psychology course in college. Clearly, you’re qualified to psychoanalyze your opponent. "Polly Purebread, by using the word zucchini in her posting, shows she has a bad case of penis envy." 3. Cross-post your flames. Everyone on the net is just waiting for the next literary masterpiece to leave your terminal! From the Apple II RoundTable to X-10 Powerhouse RoundTable, they are all holding their breath until your next flame. Therefore, post everywhere. 4. Conspiracies abound. If everyone is against you, the reason can’t *possibly* be that you are a sh**head. There’s obviously a conspiracy against you, and you’ll be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it. 5. Lawsuit threats. This is the reverse of Rule #4 (sort of like the Yin & Yang of Flaming). Threatening a lawsuit is always considered to be in good form. "By saying that I’ve posted to the wrong group, Bertha has libeled me, slandered me, and sodomized me. See you in court, Bertha." 6. Force them to document their claims. Even if Harry Hoinkus states outright that he likes tomato sauce on his pasta, you should demand documentation. If Newsweek hasn’t written an article on Harry’s pasta preferences, then Harry’s obviously lying. 7. Use foreign phrases. French is good, but Latin is the lingua franca of Flaming. You should use the words "ad hominem" at least three times per article. Other favorite Latin phrases are "ad nauseum","veni, vidi, vici", and fetuccini alfredo (unless you’re Harry Hoinkus). 8. Tell em how smart you are. Why use intelligent arguments to convince them you’re smart when all you have to do is tell them? State that you’re a member of Mensa, or Mega, or Dorks of America. Tell them the scores you received on every exam since high school. "I got an 800 on my SATs, GREs, MCATs, and I can also spell the word premeiotic." 9. Accuse your opponent of censorship. It is your right as an American citizen to post whatever the hell you want to the net (as guaranteed by the 37th Amendment, I think). Anyone who tries to limit your cross-posting or move a flame ware to e-mail is either a communist, a fascist, or both. 10. Doubt their existence. You’ve never actually seen your opponent, have you? And since you’re the center of the universe, you should have seen them by now, shouldn’t you? Therefore, THEY DON’T EXIST! this is the beauty of flamers’ logic. 11. Lie, cheat, steal, leave the toilet seat up! 12. When in doubt, INSULT. If you forget the other 11 rules, remember this one. At some point during your wonderful career as a Flamer you will undoubtedly end up in a flame war with someone who is better than you. This person will expose your lies, tear apart your arguments, make you look generally like a bozo. At this point, there is only one thing to do; INSULT THE DIRTBAG!! "Oh yeah? Well, your mother does strange things with vegetables." I hope this helps you guys work things out! ;~) Bob – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – >Hello Frantik Fraud Die, > Jerry the bleacher screamer rants: > >Just stick to the point, the issue was > >conditioning the ecollar. > Yes, I do it every day. Any questions on my success of it, > please see > signature file below. >Let’s look a little deeper, shall we, Fred??? Because I’m >telling you, you are doing it incorrectly, as you did with >cindi’s dog. > >You seem to forget all about it. You seem to > >make stupid excuses for not doing what you >are supposed > to. > Please see signature file below, to see the results that can > be attained > doing what I do. >Good for you. HOWE about some STRAIGHT freaking answers??? >Howe come you don’t address conditioning the ecollar in the >snake proofing threads? Didn’t you notice that people are >INCORRECTLY and IMPROPERLY snake proofing their dogs, without >proper prior conditioning of the ecollar according to the >MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS? >Howe come you don’t speak up, being the expert you are? I’ve >pointed out, that the snake proofing will not be effective >AFTER THE "TRAINING," without the collar being worn, if the >dog has not been PROPERLY conditioned to it, prior to, and >after abuse? >What gives? Did you miss those threads, Fred??? >Let’s have a straight answer, eh fraud die? >The collar is supposed to be conditioned to the dog both >before and after use, for a significant period of time. >You are avoiding the question, that’s why I’m sending this as >a new message, eh FRED? >Your ridiculous sig file does not address the question… The >question is, HOWE come you do not address proper conditioning >of the ecollar prior to use in snake proofing, or ANY other >training problem??? Like when cindi visited and got her dog >burned for an hour or so? Remember? That dog had no prior >conditioning, and never did accomplish a reliable recall… >and showed signs of nervousness afterward… >You are the "pro" that I’m interested in EXPOSING as a FRAUD, >and IGNORAMUS. >What is your defense to not understanding or using the >conditioning that is >explicitly specified by the manufacturer of the product that >you misuse? >What is your defense to not advising those people interested >in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER >BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for >conditioning the collar? >Don’t forget, those people that attend a "snake proofing >event," such as web weave enjoyed with her dog as he screamed >and FLIPPED IN THE AIR, ass over bucket, when he got burned, >are not regular ecollar users, they borrow the device at the >event… And you don’t even think of mentioning it??? >HOWE about it, FRAUD DIE? >Are you content to see people improperly snake proof their >dogs, and believe they are protected? It seems that way to >everybody watching, doesn’t it? Better come up with something >fast… >You have no excuse, except that you are an idiot. You could >just say that you don’t care that lots of people are >INEFFECTIVELY "snake proofing" their dogs… That too, would >be consistent with you and your kind. >The dog, in order to work without the E-collar, must be >properly conditioned to it, prior to and after abuse. It is in >the owner’s manual from the ecollar manufacturers. The >manufacturer is aware of the difficulties that will happen if >the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. >The collar is necessarily supposed to be worn for a period of >time prior to abusing the dog with it. And, it should remain >on the dog for a period of time after the abuse. >Otherwise, the collar will be associated ONLY with the >problem, and the dog will ONLY respond to the problem, ONLY if >the collar is being worn. Without the proper PREREQUISITE >conditioning, all the snake proofing that webweave and >lyinglynn and the other morons here, often like to see >committed against their dogs, goes right down the crapper. >That is why they sell a DUMMY collar, so the dog doesn’t break >the piece of crap during the couple of weeks it’s NEEDED>. >Howe about that??? >Why ELSE would the mfg. have the instructions in their manual? >It’s probably on the >first page after sparking the damn thing up. Is it for idiots >like you to ignore and do as they please? >The manufacturer is fully aware of the difficulties that will >happen if the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. >That is why they took the trouble to include the instructions >for conditioning in the owner’s manual. >Why would the manufacturers have the instructions in their >manual? Why would they sell a DUMMY collar, specifically for >that purpose? Is there no point in following the instructions >from the manufacturer? >Are the ecollar manufacturers perpetrating a fraud, when they >sell the DUMMY collar specifically for that purpose? >That’ll be rich, you telling us, that the manufacturers sell >the dummy collar, just to rip us off, eh FRED??? >What the hell is wrong with you??? >There is no point in using common sense with you, you are an >incompetent trainer but an excellent fraud. >There is no point in examining the issue, you are hiding >behind misdirection and deception, as you often try to do… >People see right through you, freddie. It’s just like it was >when your were being a weasel in school. Everybody knows… >There is no point in discussing this with you, unless you are >willing to accept and ADMIT the TRUTH… >FAT CHANCE!!! >I have proven my point. I have shown you and the others that >approve of burning dogs to teach them things, that you are >doing it INCORRECTLY and INEFFECTIVELY… >Your statement that aversives must be CONSTANTLY repeated >further proves my point. >Now, as for YOUR FAVORITE statement, that reinforcement never >ends, that part is true. >Here’s WHY! When fear, force, and punishment are used for >training, the training will only be effective if the fear, >force, or abuser are present. >You are welcome to have your pals at tritronics discuss this >with me here on the board. >Best regards, your pal, Jerry.
Response:
Hello Bob, Thanks for the rules, but I don’t play by them. I don’t count points, I go for the kill, and I play for keeps. Jerry.
Response:
I saw this in another NG. I tought of posting it here too!!! LOL – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – > The Twelve Commandments of Flaming > 1. Make things up about your opponent. It is important to make your lies > sound true. Preface your argument with the word clearly. "Clearly, Fred > Flooney is a liar, and a dirtball to boot." > 2. Be an armchair psychologist. Youre a smart person. You’ve heard of > Freud. You took a psychology course in college. Clearly, you’re > qualified to psychoanalyze your opponent. "Polly Purebread, by using the > word zucchini in her posting, shows she has a bad case of penis envy." > 3. Cross-post your flames. Everyone on the net is just waiting for the > next literary masterpiece to leave your terminal! From the Apple II > RoundTable to X-10 Powerhouse RoundTable, they are all holding their > breath until your next flame. Therefore, post everywhere. > 4. Conspiracies abound. If everyone is against you, the reason can’t > *possibly* be that you are a sh**head. There’s obviously a conspiracy > against you, and you’ll be doing the entire net a favor by exposing it. > 5. Lawsuit threats. This is the reverse of Rule #4 (sort of like the Yin > & Yang of Flaming). Threatening a lawsuit is always considered to be in > good form. "By saying that I’ve posted to the wrong group, Bertha has > libeled me, slandered me, and sodomized me. See you in court, Bertha." > 6. Force them to document their claims. Even if Harry Hoinkus states > outright that he likes tomato sauce on his pasta, you should demand > documentation. If Newsweek hasn’t written an article on Harry’s pasta > preferences, then Harry’s obviously lying. > 7. Use foreign phrases. French is good, but Latin is the lingua franca > of Flaming. You should use the words "ad hominem" at least three times > per article. Other favorite Latin phrases are "ad nauseum","veni, vidi, > vici", and fetuccini alfredo (unless you’re Harry Hoinkus). > 8. Tell em how smart you are. Why use intelligent arguments to convince > them you’re smart when all you have to do is tell them? State that you’re > a member of Mensa, or Mega, or Dorks of America. Tell them the scores you > received on every exam since high school. "I got an 800 on my SATs, GREs, > MCATs, and I can also spell the word premeiotic." > 9. Accuse your opponent of censorship. It is your right as an American > citizen to post whatever the hell you want to the net (as guaranteed by > the 37th Amendment, I think). Anyone who tries to limit your > cross-posting or move a flame ware to e-mail is either a communist, a > fascist, or both. > 10. Doubt their existence. You’ve never actually seen your opponent, > have you? And since you’re the center of the universe, you should have > seen them by now, shouldn’t you? Therefore, THEY DON’T EXIST! this is > the beauty of flamers’ logic. > 11. Lie, cheat, steal, leave the toilet seat up! > 12. When in doubt, INSULT. If you forget the other 11 rules, remember > this one. At some point during your wonderful career as a Flamer you will > undoubtedly end up in a flame war with someone who is better than you. > This person will expose your lies, tear apart your arguments, make you > look generally like a bozo. At this point, there is only one thing to do; > INSULT THE DIRTBAG!! "Oh yeah? Well, your mother does strange things > with vegetables." > I hope this helps you guys work things out! > ;~) > Bob >Hello Frantik Fraud Die, >> Jerry the bleacher screamer rants: >> >Just stick to the point, the issue was >> >conditioning the ecollar. >> Yes, I do it every day. Any questions on my success of it, >> please see >> signature file below. >Let’s look a little deeper, shall we, Fred??? Because I’m >telling you, you are doing it incorrectly, as you did with >cindi’s dog. >> >You seem to forget all about it. You seem to >> >make stupid excuses for not doing what you >are supposed >> to. >> Please see signature file below, to see the results that can >> be attained >> doing what I do. >Good for you. HOWE about some STRAIGHT freaking answers??? >Howe come you don’t address conditioning the ecollar in the >snake proofing threads? Didn’t you notice that people are >INCORRECTLY and IMPROPERLY snake proofing their dogs, without >proper prior conditioning of the ecollar according to the >MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS? >Howe come you don’t speak up, being the expert you are? I’ve >pointed out, that the snake proofing will not be effective >AFTER THE "TRAINING," without the collar being worn, if the >dog has not been PROPERLY conditioned to it, prior to, and >after abuse? >What gives? Did you miss those threads, Fred??? >Let’s have a straight answer, eh fraud die? >The collar is supposed to be conditioned to the dog both >before and after use, for a significant period of time. >You are avoiding the question, that’s why I’m sending this as >a new message, eh FRED? >Your ridiculous sig file does not address the question… The >question is, HOWE come you do not address proper conditioning >of the ecollar prior to use in snake proofing, or ANY other >training problem??? Like when cindi visited and got her dog >burned for an hour or so? Remember? That dog had no prior >conditioning, and never did accomplish a reliable recall… >and showed signs of nervousness afterward… >You are the "pro" that I’m interested in EXPOSING as a FRAUD, >and IGNORAMUS. >What is your defense to not understanding or using the >conditioning that is >explicitly specified by the manufacturer of the product that >you misuse? >What is your defense to not advising those people interested >in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER >BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for >conditioning the collar? >Don’t forget, those people that attend a "snake proofing >event," such as web weave enjoyed with her dog as he screamed >and FLIPPED IN THE AIR, ass over bucket, when he got burned, >are not regular ecollar users, they borrow the device at the >event… And you don’t even think of mentioning it??? >HOWE about it, FRAUD DIE? >Are you content to see people improperly snake proof their >dogs, and believe they are protected? It seems that way to >everybody watching, doesn’t it? Better come up with something >fast… >You have no excuse, except that you are an idiot. You could >just say that you don’t care that lots of people are >INEFFECTIVELY "snake proofing" their dogs… That too, would >be consistent with you and your kind. >The dog, in order to work without the E-collar, must be >properly conditioned to it, prior to and after abuse. It is in >the owner’s manual from the ecollar manufacturers. The >manufacturer is aware of the difficulties that will happen if >the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. >The collar is necessarily supposed to be worn for a period of >time prior to abusing the dog with it. And, it should remain >on the dog for a period of time after the abuse. >Otherwise, the collar will be associated ONLY with the >problem, and the dog will ONLY respond to the problem, ONLY if >the collar is being worn. Without the proper PREREQUISITE >conditioning, all the snake proofing that webweave and >lyinglynn and the other morons here, often like to see >committed against their dogs, goes right down the crapper. >That is why they sell a DUMMY collar, so the dog doesn’t break >the piece of crap during the couple of weeks it’s NEEDED>. >Howe about that??? >Why ELSE would the mfg. have the instructions in their manual? >It’s probably on the >first page after sparking the damn thing up. Is it for idiots >like you to ignore and do as they please? >The manufacturer is fully aware of the difficulties that will >happen if the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. >That is why they took the trouble to include the instructions >for conditioning in the owner’s manual. >Why would the manufacturers have the instructions in their >manual? Why would they sell a DUMMY collar, specifically for >that purpose? Is there no point in following the instructions >from the manufacturer? >Are the ecollar manufacturers perpetrating a fraud, when they >sell the DUMMY collar specifically for that purpose? >That’ll be rich, you telling us, that the manufacturers sell >the dummy collar, just to rip us off, eh FRED??? >What the hell is wrong with you??? >There is no point in using common sense with you, you are an >incompetent trainer but an excellent fraud. >There is no point in examining the issue, you are hiding >behind misdirection and deception, as you often try to do… >People see right through you, freddie. It’s just like it was >when your were being a weasel in school. Everybody knows… >There is no point in discussing this with you, unless you are >willing to accept and ADMIT the TRUTH… >FAT CHANCE!!! >I have proven my point. I have shown you and the others that >approve of burning dogs to teach them things, that you are >doing it INCORRECTLY and INEFFECTIVELY… >Your statement that aversives must be CONSTANTLY repeated >further proves my point. >Now, as for YOUR FAVORITE statement, that reinforcement never >ends, that part is true. >Here’s WHY! When fear, force, and punishment are used for >training, the training will only be effective if the fear, >force, or abuser are present. >You are welcome to have your pals at tritronics discuss this >with me here on the board. >Best regards, your pal, Jerry.
… read more »
Response:
Hello Frantik Fraud Die, > Jerry the bleacher screamer rants: >Just stick to the point, the issue was >conditioning the ecollar. > Yes, I do it every day. Any questions on my success of it, > please see > signature file below.
Let’s look a little deeper, shall we, Fred??? Because I’m telling you, you are doing it incorrectly, as you did with cindi’s dog. > >You seem to forget all about it. You seem to >make stupid excuses for not doing what you >are supposed > to. > Please see signature file below, to see the results that can > be attained > doing what I do.
Good for you. HOWE about some STRAIGHT freaking answers??? Howe come you don’t address conditioning the ecollar in the snake proofing threads? Didn’t you notice that people are INCORRECTLY and IMPROPERLY snake proofing their dogs, without proper prior conditioning of the ecollar according to the MANUFACTURERS INSTRUCTIONS? Howe come you don’t speak up, being the expert you are? I’ve pointed out, that the snake proofing will not be effective AFTER THE "TRAINING," without the collar being worn, if the dog has not been PROPERLY conditioned to it, prior to, and after abuse? What gives? Did you miss those threads, Fred??? Let’s have a straight answer, eh fraud die? The collar is supposed to be conditioned to the dog both before and after use, for a significant period of time. You are avoiding the question, that’s why I’m sending this as a new message, eh FRED? Your ridiculous sig file does not address the question… The question is, HOWE come you do not address proper conditioning of the ecollar prior to use in snake proofing, or ANY other training problem??? Like when cindi visited and got her dog burned for an hour or so? Remember? That dog had no prior conditioning, and never did accomplish a reliable recall… and showed signs of nervousness afterward… You are the "pro" that I’m interested in EXPOSING as a FRAUD, and IGNORAMUS. What is your defense to not understanding or using the conditioning that is explicitly specified by the manufacturer of the product that you misuse? What is your defense to not advising those people interested in using the ecollar for snake proofing, or ANY OTHER BEHAVIOR, to follow the MANUFACTURERS instructions for conditioning the collar? Don’t forget, those people that attend a "snake proofing event," such as web weave enjoyed with her dog as he screamed and FLIPPED IN THE AIR, ass over bucket, when he got burned, are not regular ecollar users, they borrow the device at the event… And you don’t even think of mentioning it??? HOWE about it, FRAUD DIE? Are you content to see people improperly snake proof their dogs, and believe they are protected? It seems that way to everybody watching, doesn’t it? Better come up with something fast… You have no excuse, except that you are an idiot. You could just say that you don’t care that lots of people are INEFFECTIVELY "snake proofing" their dogs… That too, would be consistent with you and your kind. The dog, in order to work without the E-collar, must be properly conditioned to it, prior to and after abuse. It is in the owner’s manual from the ecollar manufacturers. The manufacturer is aware of the difficulties that will happen if the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. The collar is necessarily supposed to be worn for a period of time prior to abusing the dog with it. And, it should remain on the dog for a period of time after the abuse. Otherwise, the collar will be associated ONLY with the problem, and the dog will ONLY respond to the problem, ONLY if the collar is being worn. Without the proper PREREQUISITE conditioning, all the snake proofing that webweave and lyinglynn and the other morons here, often like to see committed against their dogs, goes right down the crapper. That is why they sell a DUMMY collar, so the dog doesn’t break the piece of crap during the couple of weeks it’s NEEDED>. Howe about that??? Why ELSE would the mfg. have the instructions in their manual? It’s probably on the first page after sparking the damn thing up. Is it for idiots like you to ignore and do as they please? The manufacturer is fully aware of the difficulties that will happen if the unit is not properly conditioned to the dog. That is why they took the trouble to include the instructions for conditioning in the owner’s manual. Why would the manufacturers have the instructions in their manual? Why would they sell a DUMMY collar, specifically for that purpose? Is there no point in following the instructions from the manufacturer? Are the ecollar manufacturers perpetrating a fraud, when they sell the DUMMY collar specifically for that purpose? That’ll be rich, you telling us, that the manufacturers sell the dummy collar, just to rip us off, eh FRED??? What the hell is wrong with you??? There is no point in using common sense with you, you are an incompetent trainer but an excellent fraud. There is no point in examining the issue, you are hiding behind misdirection and deception, as you often try to do… People see right through you, freddie. It’s just like it was when your were being a weasel in school. Everybody knows… There is no point in discussing this with you, unless you are willing to accept and ADMIT the TRUTH… FAT CHANCE!!! I have proven my point. I have shown you and the others that approve of burning dogs to teach them things, that you are doing it INCORRECTLY and INEFFECTIVELY… Your statement that aversives must be CONSTANTLY repeated further proves my point. Now, as for YOUR FAVORITE statement, that reinforcement never ends, that part is true. Here’s WHY! When fear, force, and punishment are used for training, the training will only be effective if the fear, force, or abuser are present. You are welcome to have your pals at tritronics discuss this with me here on the board. Best regards, your pal, Jerry.