I was spitting mad when I read my e=-mails today.  I am on a local re-cycle group [one that people can offer/ask for goods for re-cycling]. 
One of the 'Wanted' items was  Quote = corker spaniel stud dog Unquote !!!!!!!  They offered pick of litter in return.  
Needless to say I sent a 'snotty' message re why this was totally out of order - trading, profit-seeking and disregard for dog welfare/breeding to name but 3.  I quickly received a reply from the group saying that they had taken the 'wanted' ad down, but, had also taken mine off.  When I say my email was 'snotty', it was not abusive; just clearly stating some of the reasons why such a message is wrong.  Why couldn't they leave it when they kept other messages on?  My message is below.

This ad goes against the 'Freegle' rules in many ways - as the previous poster said 'no adverts for pets'.  Also, offering 'pick of litter' is not free - it is trading!
In addition, I find it very worrying that the author of this message thinks that any old Cocker Spaniel [note Cocker NOT Corker] will do to breed from.  There is no mention of health checks, breeding lines etc etc that a well-informed, caring breeder would.  It is patently obvious that the original poster is purely out to breed for profit - yet again flouting the Freegle rules.

I'm not sure how the site you are referring to actually works but if they left your message and deleted the wanted one then yours wouldn't make much sense on it's own would it?

I only ever use Freecycle - I like that they have very strict rules about what can be listed.  Our local one does, from time to time, accept 'free to good home' listings if they are linked to known local rescue organisations and each of these listings must be checked by admin before posting.

Hi Dogs a babe
Freegle used to be Freecycle - I too like the strict rules.  

> but if they left your message and deleted the wanted one then yours wouldn't make much sense on it's own would it?

The original  subject line  [ie; 'wanted corker spaniel stud ...'  postcode omitted by me] was left on the site and distributed to, and viewed by, many readers of the site; two other replies, before mine, were left on - both disagreeing with the original 'items wanted' post.  So, my post giving reasons for not having this post were IMHO needed to invalidate the post and give reasons for not carrying out/attempting to carry out this kind of transaction.