I got banned once just for asking people to sign an online petition regarding councils and numbers of dogs allowed. Never did fathom that one out! But Adam is polite, we just disagree with his methods. I think until e-collars are banned, it's not a bad thing for people to come on here asking for help, and see all the floods of people disagreeing with e-collars and telling them why they are not a good idea, at least that way they might learn it is a bad thing, whereas if e-collars are never mentioned somebody might try one because they've not read anything saying they are bad. If that makes sense!!

Adam just talks alot of twaddle, I object to the many new posters we've had past few days who keep deliberately trying to wind people up, it's so infair but if they won't do anything they can't moan when tumble weeds start drifting on the boards.

I used to believe that CD was different to other dog forums because it promoted ethical and responsible dog ownership. The threads and discussions about health testing and responsible breeding gave excellent advice, indeed the site itself will only allow breeders to advertise if they meet certain criteria - brilliant I thought.

Sadly now I am having second thoughts about the integrity of the site as a whole - it is a UK based site which promotes responsible breeding but does nothing to stop the site being flooded with self promoting videos of dogs being "trained" by methods that are illegal in Wales - a part of the very UK that the site is based in.  Of course I could be wrong or it may just be that I am cynical but the only thing I can think of that would explain the reasoning behind this is that the controversy causes an increase in posts and thus increases the number of hits the site gets which is great for the advertising revenue generated due to it's "popularity". The danger then being is the site becomes a different one to that on which it's reputation was built - those who come here for all the right reasons and help to promote ethical, responsible dog ownership will fall by the wayside and CD will become yet another run of the mill fluffy dog forum which has no substance. What a waste that would be :-(

I agree!  Seems like time to ask everyone for recommendations for other forums, sadly I think this one is on it's way out as far as I'm concerned! 

So everyone, any favourites that you can recommend - even if they are not quite what Champdogs used to be?

hmmm.. Before we all stamp our feet, and slam the door behind us... think... is this not exactly what certain members would hope for.  We would be leaving them a perfect platform.   Should we not be doing the opposite?  Stay and fight for what you all believe in!  Not in an angry (it should not be done, it;s illegal in Wales) way, but a balance debate, show everyone that the legislations was put in place for a reason.. we have to be heard.. We cannot walk away and allow new members, fluffy or otherwise to only see one side of the story..

Do not rise to the bait, do not answer in anger, and don't get drawn into personal inferences.. Stay and fight.  Debate the subject to death, but in a consise way. 
We don't need to keep refering to AP, D and O, ... is Black white? ;-) 

Champdogs is what it is.. we have to keep it for what we all know it to be, The best information exchange.. but only we can keep it that way...

Are you really all prepared to walk away, to give in and give up?

Good luck with Admin's moving goalposts kayc :-(

Fluffy members?  Hmmm .......

Alysce, they are our goalposts.. are you prepared to leave them wide open?  and the 'fluffy' thing was in response to someone else who mention the word.. nothing more, nothing less...

I would think that the term fluffy.. is a kind word meant for someone who could be taken in by others.. in other words, someone who could be taken in by those who advise less than kind means of training.. should we not stay and fight their corner too...

Get in front of the goalposts ;-)

Oooh for a deep sigh smilie!

I do see your point - will try to marshal my reserves for another bout tomorrow!

Am a bit hacked off that a mod removed one of my posts and told me it was pointless - it was a question aimed at Adam of course!

It's not a level playing field, the linesmen can't keep up (no it's not a woman) and the referee has left his yellow card at home!!!

It's a funny old game!

Not in an angry (it should not be done, it;s illegal in Wales) way, but a balance debate, show everyone that the legislations was put in place for a reason.. we have to be heard.. We cannot walk away and allow new members, fluffy or otherwise to only see one side of the story..

Isn't this exactly what we HAVE been doing for quite a while now? And all we've managed is to increase Google hits for the devices, with posters saying they work wonders. Anyone reading will take their pick of the answers, as with everything. You only need to look at breeding. The difference there is, EVERYONE here agrees on what's acceptable and what isn't, and those that don't never stick around for long.

I see your point Marianne, but, it works both ways... if we don't debate it.. no-one will see any of the down side... The adverts are going to be there regardless... google is a whole lot bigger than any of us.. including CD..

AP, and his ilk will simply keep the items at the top of the leaderboard and if we don;t respond.. then people won't need to take pick of their answers.. it will be a done deal :-(

As with breeding, there will always be those who will choose to hear what they want to hear.. but has that ever stopped us trying to guide and advise?  Should this subject be any different?

using the goalpost analogy.. even if the final score is 50/50 draw.. would a 50% success not be worth the initial google hits  than 100/0 failure because we have kept silent.  With the type of post headers that AP makes.. the hits are going to come anyway...

I hate those devices with a passion, and have little regard for those who cannot see past them..

Do we walk away or do what we have always done.. give out good, informed advice.. and hope that some of it is taken on board?

Whilst I wouldn't dream of telling admin their job, and it is their site and theirs to run any way they please..

On the site I mod, AP's behaviour would be considered trolling - every post he makes discussing them bumps that page up on google, every link he posts does the same.

However, on the site I mod, we have a 'forum philosophy' which this particular subject matter falls outside of so on those grounds alone, we can and do ban people for promoting them.

Does admin/owner of champdogs not see a case for changing the ToS to disallow the promotion of such devices/training methods?

Has anyone considered that maybe the admins actually recommend/like these devices.It seems so odd they seem so determined to allow their promotion when everyone else wants these posters banned?
I too am close to leaving the forum as I really don't like the way these devices are promoted. I have reported posts in the past but have had no response from the admins and nothing changes. I no longer visit the behaviour board.

Helensdogz,
I am unsure who you mean by "admins" but if you mean admin and mods then I should like to make it clear that I, as a moderator, am against the use of shock collars. I hope you have had a response if you have sent me a pm - I suspect so. We are quick to complain when certain people use the "tar them all the same" brush but some people are happy for it to be used when it suits.
Kind regards,

Jeff.

Well, these are my thoughts for what they are worth:

Firstly - I'm going to put my hands together and give Admin and our Mods a huge clap, (they are trying)

I kept popping in for a look to monitor the situation and from the bits I saw last night it was like WW2 we were being bombed continuously, (sorry had friends over or would have leapt in too) well done to all who went through that.

So let's give the board and yourselves some credit, it's a difficult situation. The controversial post is working, so pleased to see posts moved there, let's give it some time.

It's more than obvious that the 3 posters will continue to come on site as it is how they advertise and tout for custom, which is why they will not leave, our mods and admin are going to continue with our help of report, (no point in us debating with them, really no point, do it myself, but no point) just report to delete the self promoting posts, the I'm a trainer, I help dogs, I use this product blah, blah, blah purely self promoting they can be deleted or put in controversial, then we are just left with the likes of O who we don't have to communicate with.

If you ignore - you can't report.
If you leave - they take over the board and advice on the better training methods are lost.

Where is that British spirit, we don't run when under attack.

Admin, it is not just a point of most of us disagreeing with their methods and your obvious references to other debates of unpopular issues it is the continual bombing and self advertising, tbh there have been many opportunities for some of these posters to be removed due to breaking of the TOS.

Let's get through another day and help our mods and admin, well done last night.

I haven't read all the thread, so forgive me if I am repeating what has already been said. I've got all the shock collar promoters on Ignore (which is fab) but it is annoying that they are allowed to constantly wreck threads, turn conversations to shock collars and generally promote their wares. Sometimes on a forum, after some discussion, they are banned and are not allowed back. I am not sure how this is done, but clearly, it can be done, because it has been done :)

I am against shock collars, but would not mind a sensible debate. What I so despise about these people is that they use nasty tactics, lies, attempted intimidation and show videos to make their point ( which just shows dogs looking unhappy and stressed, which, although in one way is amusing, as it kind of counters their own claims, it is not nice to see). They are totally incapable of reasoned debate if it means their shock collars come out looking bad (which of course they do, every time!). They  do, I feel, promote abuse and, as has I am sure been pointed out previously, on parental forums abusers would not be allowed.

There is no point in debating with them, because they have made up their minds long ago and rely on shock collars to train. They are on here purely to promote shock collars and are not interested in genuine debate or in educating themselves. They are mostly bad trainers who can only train dogs with electricity. 

There are loads of reasons to ban them. They must expect to be banned at some point, it won't be new to them!

Jeff,

no I didn't mean you but in the past I have used the report feature but haven't noticed any posts being removed or had any response from who ever sees the reported posts.
I find it strange that a forum that is so keen to promote the best in responsible ethical dog breeding and care does not also have a policy to promote good training methods. I am sure if there were a few people who came on here promoting puppy farming breeding for profit and how to cut corners when rearing a litter then they would soon be banned so why can't the shock collar promoters be banned?

Where is that British spirit, we don't run when under attack

That explains me then -Sweden has never taken part in any war. :)

There is no point in debating with them, because they have made up their minds long ago and rely on shock collars to train. They are on here purely to promote shock collars and are not interested in genuine debate or in educating themselves. They are mostly bad trainers who can only train dogs with electricity. 

Exactly! This is it.

I've had enough now and will leave. If the zappers ever get banned, please somebody let me know and then I will come back. Until then -bye.

Ok I get it fight fight fight...

but other forums have removed them ?  That's what I don't understand - why should we have to keep fighting?

Marianne - why should we have to fight them?  Why is it up to us to keep fighting...

Enjoy the battle guys its not for me and good luck x

Helensdogz,

As mentioned many, many times before mods do not set policy - we just try to keep the peace! :-)
Jeff.

> Ok I get it fight fight fight...
>
> but other forums have removed them ?&nbsp; That's what I don't understand - why should we have to keep fighting? <IMG class=qButton title="Quote selected text" alt="Quote selected text" src="/images/mi_quote.gif" width=20 height=10>

We have no choice... how long ago was Dennis banned, then banned again under another pseudonym, and then again under yet another name.. and hey presto, he is back again... banning doesn't work.. fighting the cause just might...

Can the fight not be against the likes of Dennis.. but FOR the poor dogs who will suffer because of the D's and AP's..

As mentioned many, many times before mods do not set policy - we just try to keep the peace!

Jeff, you are gold :)
As you say, you don't set policy, only Admin can do that presumably.

Yes Kay a fair point re: the dogs but I still don't understand why CD won't ban them?  Why should they be given this forum to air their views?  Other forums removed them?   What's different?

Ignore previously was a view that members were not happy with a posters comments/views but now this is just for our own sanity apparently?  The only reason I put people on ignore was in the hope they were banned as I always read the posts anyway!  But no this was changed magically in five minutes?

I can see what is trying to be done but the constant battle is tiring...

but yes for the poor dogs... :( 

So many trainers seem to be offering this at the moment - the zappers on here are such a small minority - really hope that soon the whole of the UK make these barbaric items illegal.

why should we have to keep fighting?

Because admin believes in free speech, these training methods are not banned in the rest of the Uk YET! they can not ban people for having different views.

What Mark is not doing is seeing just how badly they are infiltrating the board, how they are constantly promoting, this is the fight I mean, we have to report, report, report, so that he can see, no-one needs to constantly be on the board promoting their methods it is bully tactics and selling/promoting tactics. If someone continues a 'debate' when no-one is asking for it or reacting to it, they then become TROLLS, who need to be removed.

If Mark does not see they are breaching the TOS, if he does not see how we are being constantly bombarded and hounded, not just in a one off debate, but every single day, then I'm in agreement I don't want to be here either, and I will be disappointed that he doesn't give a hoot. I'm giving Mark the benefit of the doubt for now that he does not realise the extent of what is going on and once he does he will put his foot down and say enough!

He's said himself, he does not often read the boards, he's watching at present so we need to bring things to his attention.

> As mentioned many, many times before mods do not set policy - we just try to keep the peace!

Jeff, I know and I am not unhappy with the mods. I am unhappy with whoever it is who does set the policies. Surely they could set a policy that aversive training methods should not be promoted. Other forums do.
I am sure in the past people have had posts edited for putting links to sites on them but the Zappers keep posting links to videos showing shock collars.
We are not allowed to mention breeds on the breeding forum as it might be seen as advertising our puppies  but the zappers are able to continually promote their abusive methods. If every post promoting the use of shock collars and the like was removed then these people would eventually give up.
If this does not happen soon then I too will be leaving and I will not renew my champdogs site when it expires.

Goldmali, I wish you wouldn't, but I guess it's your prerogative. :-( {{{{hug}}}} (hope to see you soon)

Teri and HG don't visit anymore either, the board becomes a less charismatic place, year by year......................

Ignore previously was a view that members were not happy with a posters comments/views but now this is just for our own sanity apparently?  The only reason I put people on ignore was in the hope they were banned as I always read the posts anyway!  But no this was changed magically in five minutes?

I actually don't read the posts, I really do Ignore, 99.9 per cent of the time, and at the moment it's 100%. However, I do recall people being banned due to lots of Ignores I am sure, so altering that isn't right.

Someone mentioned Freedom of Speech. The thing with this is, when you get bullies and constant arguments, it doesn't actually promote free speech at all. What it does do is create a stilted, bullying environment which stagnates and means that new people get scared off. It's not as if the shock collar people don't know this, they love it and enjoy it.

The other thing that happens is that people don't get help they ask for and need, even when desperate, because threads get taken over.

So basically, for me, Freedom of Speech must somehow have a sort of moderation and actually, odd though it sounds, to encourage fair debate, one does have to get rid of people who resort to bullying/aggression/lies and so on. (Not just shock collar people but anyone who does this).

I miss Teri, Isabel, HG and a few others. Mind you, people do move on with their lives. I used to go on lots of forums, now I only go on a few as my life has altered and I'm now too busy! :)

> Shock collars and prong collars may not be a method advocated by the majority of members here but what is absolutely indisputable is, THEY WORK!

admin edit : if you wish to debate the pros & cons of e collars please do so here

> If you want a forum that only allows postings of positive training methods, those forums surely exist.&nbsp; Find one, go there and quit your whining.

THIS forum, was one such forum. We don't need to go away to find another, it would be beneficial to everyone if you would go and find another forum, full of people that advocat inflicting pain under the name of 'training'.

> Someone mentioned Freedom of Speech. The thing with this is, when you get bullies and constant arguments, it doesn't actually promote free speech at all. What it does do is create a stilted, bullying environment which stagnates and means that new people get scared off. It's not as if the shock collar people don't know this, they love it and enjoy it.

Unfortuantely they know exacly how to wind up others without it appearing like a blatent inflamatory post :(

While I'm posting - I must appologise for my outburst earlier that resulted in a thread getting pulled. I am extremely sorry to the origional poster for this and I am sorry to cause offence to anybody that had the misfortune of reading my post before it was taken away.

admin edit : if you wish to debate the pros & cons of e collars please do so here

Also not aimed at anyone in particular, just tagging on the end ...

Perhaps it would be an idea for there to be one agreed response to such posts, worded in a non-inflammatory way which addresses the issues of such methods and where they have been legislated against. One person posts it and then any other posts on the subject are ignored. This way, people who wish to take the advice have the opportunity to learn and draw their own conclusions, and the troublesome posters can just be left on 'ignore'.

M.

>Perhaps it would be an idea for there to be one agreed response to such posts

There is and it goes like this :

If you wish to debate the pros & cons of e collars please do so here

> Perhaps it would be an idea for there to be one agreed response to such posts

I think we should work with the things Admin have put in place, allthough we would all like to see a complete ban on the advocation of aversive methods, I really don't thhink that is going to happen. As it is, with the simple remark below, we can direct the e-collar debates away from the main stream topics (it may help if we report such posts to Admin, so they are aware of which ones need moving).

Hopefully this way, the boards can be cleared of all the arguments (and peoples threads wont get locked/removed thanks to people like me throwing a tantrum :( )

The 'controversial stuff' board, only contains posts that are pre-authorised by admin, so there is no risk of things escalating out of control or getting too personal.
The e-collar topic is very long-winded (it has a few posts with me waffling away or England on it!), and I am sure not everybody popping by for some training info would be bothered to sit there and read the lot, so in a way, the 'contoversial stuff' board, is a way of sticking the rubbish out of sight :)

Use this : If you wish to debate the pros & cons of e collars please do so here (include URL for 'conroversial stuff' board)

and below is the URL to be included in the above sentance where it says 'here'
http://www.champdogsforum.co.uk/board/board/26.html

How to:
highlight the word 'here', click the little grey button at the top of your posting window that says 'url', it will put [u r l = ] [ / url] either side of the word (minus all the spaces). You click immediately after the = and past in the URL for the 'controversial stuff' board :)

Well, the only person left now that can do anything about these type of people is Admin

On another forum, said person was on, Admin gave the decision to the members as to what to do with him..........he is now banned!!

> Am a bit hacked off that a mod removed one of my posts and told me it was pointless - it was a question aimed at Adam of course!

My post was removed in the  thread about those collars and i happened to call them 'barbaric' . What happened to having an opinion and freedom of speech ?

I had another post on the controversial forum disallowed because I told Adam I didnt think he understood the training terms he was bandying about.

Wonder if this post will be removed too!

He spends so much time on here promoting zapping dogs that i wonder when he has time to do any training , if indeed he actually does training .

Desperation perhaps as he hopefully doesn't have many enquiries :-)

At least if he is sitting at his computer he won't be using the barbaric collars

And that is what I keep saying - other forums banned him why not here?

The person in question has now posted the same thing on a forum I use everyday....so far they have no one agreeing with them.

>I think we should work with the things Admin have put in place, allthough we would all like to see a complete ban on the advocation of aversive methods, I really don't thhink that is going to happen.

I totally agree with you regarding the above point.  I don't agree with AP and what he stands for but 2 months ago no-one had heard of him and now, for me at least, his name is synonymous with e-collars and what i consider to be undesirable training methods.  He has always been polite in how he presents his argument and doesn't resort to personal attacks on individuals (unlike some of those who have responded to him).

This forum needs to have freedom of speech to prevent it from being viewed as a cliquey, sheep like forum full of people who all say the same things and have the same views on everything due to being brainwashed by the clique.  What I like about CD is that it isn't predictable.  There is always someone who has a view on or experience of a topic that can flip my own perspective on it and it is only by debating the issues that this can happen.

Variety is good and rather than continuing to use an individual's name and their line of business, I also agree with the other poster who indicated using either initials or a representative word and responding with a stock response about positive training methods.

For people who have been here many years, the ebb and flow of the forum where peace reigns then aggro breaks out will be familiar.  I could name lots of posters where war has broken out in relation to feeding, training methods, health issues, exercise etc etc.  CD will continue to flow and for those who are aggrieved by certain posters, don't read those threads if it upsets you.  Life is too short to be stressing about keyboard warriors.

> for those who are aggrieved by certain posters, don't read those threads if it upsets you.

But if, for example, you were to put A on 'ignore' you would not be able to see him advocating shock collars so you would not be able to state that it is undesirable, in your opinion, and offer alternative methods of training . People would then come on CD looking for advice and just find A and his collars .

A is not the only annoying member of CD, others are available !!!

St.Domingo You don't have to put someone on ignore to not read their posts.  There are some posters whose posts I skim over quickly or see their name and don't read the content and many others whose advice I really respect and would take the time to read properly.  I don't think I have anyone currently on ignore, so I can still respond as I see fit but not get too caught up in the drama.

In the last few years, from memory there has been uproar and people threatening to leave the forum in relation to adverts, inclusion of emoticons, the removal of emoticons, multiple changes in the style of the forum, particular posters etc.  It happens and will continue to happen and the membership will continue to evolve. 

General reply.  I can't vote in the poll thread because I can't honestly say either No or Yes.  It's a tricky two-part question.  But I can say here that I believe open discussion is the best way to advance your views, if that's your goal.  And knowing your adversaries' arguments is necessary to help you develop counter arguments.  It's a basic tenet of debating, know what the other guy espouses, research the failings, offer your alternative, provide documentation.  This latter is one I particularly like to see on an internet chat board.  Sorry but I don't know many of you (but I have been here since 2005 and I do recognize lots of names I put a lot of stock in) and your opinion is valid but worth more to me if you can back it up.  Much more help to me too. 

Why ban a topic when you could reach more people by exposing it?   All that does is let folks get their information from someone who will provide it without benefit of your intervention or comments.  I think that's quitting.

> Why ban a topic when you could reach more people by exposing it?   All that does is let folks get their information from someone who will provide it without >benefit of your intervention or comments

Very good point :)

> I can't vote in the poll thread because I can't honestly say either No or Yes.

You can :) Requested answers are either 'Yes', 'No', or 'Don't know'. The undecided can still join in :)

> opinion is valid but worth more to me if you can back it up

I completely see you point and an honest debate is defiantely somthing that can inform people of the facts so be very usefull.

Unfortuantely, due to the emotiveness of the subjct (or the blatent manipulation of the truth by some people due to a vested financial interest), things are being brandinshed about as 'fact' when they are not. Also operant conditioning terms are being used in such a way as to make some things seem like horrible things when they are not (the operant terminology can be misleading unless you know what the terms really mean), which, unfortunatley, leaves those that have not allready re-searched training methods in some depths, with a completely warped perspective of things :(

'Debates' such as these do nothing for reward-based training (which the majority of us here advocate) and even less for spreading factual inforamtion :(

I haven't read the whole thread, but I do know the poster you are discussing. I don't think they should be banned. I don't agree with their methods but I think that a more appropriate method would be removing their posts when they are not actually anything to do with the thread. They will soon learn when they're posting unsolicited messages and will get bored.

Banning him for what is essentially his opinion isn't right- where to we draw the line?