[rec.birds] So am I, waiting

denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) (12/07/89)

In article <1045@dinorah.wustl.edu> mary@dinorah.wustl.edu (Mary E. Leibach) writes:
>Denise Caire writes:
>
>>Again, all you we-hate-cats people 
>
>First off, I, among others in this group, do not hate cats.  I love
>them.  However this is hardly the group in which to expect cat fan
>clubs.

I can't help but notice you along with Ed B., Mikki B., Mike M.,
K. Sullivan, and who knows who all never address the fact that
someone in this group said to shoot cats enticed to birds at feeders.

From all the bad mouthing I've received in an open forum, I'ld say 
this is an emotional issue.  Step back from your emotions and see
the facts.  (I will be researching over my Christmas vacation).

I also find the amount of support I've received through e-mail, NOT
this group, to be quite revealing.  Interesting how some choose to 
support me behind the backs of the folks in this group.  What do you
make of that?

You, in the open forum, think you can shut me up and shoo me away
because you don't want to open your eyes.  I will not be "crowed"
into shutting up and if that "ruffles your feathers", then so be it.
  
>And when we try to we get sick jokes hurled at us.  Or at least I do.
>The rest are probably too smart to bother even trying.

Hey, I already admitted that the joke was uncalled for, but it did
startle you, didn't it?  That is exactly how I felt when shooting cats
was suggested.  And I retaliated with a sick joke that wasn't in the
least bit funny, and I knew that.

>
>>Surely there must be a couple intelligent people 
>cats mauling them aren't intelligent, would you?
>

Well, as I have already suggested in a previous response, you could
try supporting environmentally conscience groups (as I'm sure many of
you do) instead of "sticking your heads in the sand" and saying that
cats are bad.  (If you truely like cats, then "scratch" the last
sentance).  

>>this net who could research this topic (controlling cats) and make
>>suggestions as to what will work.  Just think, you could make a million
>>bucks with an answer to this one!
>
>Like I suggested before, this is rec.birds.  The people here are
>concerned about keeping cats OUT of THEIR yards.  Experts on methods
>to safely keep YOUR cat IN YOUR yard are to be found in abundance in
>rec.pets .  Why don't you ask some of them?
>Or don't you really want to know?

I guess what really "sticks in my craw" is the fact that it is so easy
to place a feeder where cats can't get to birds, why not do it?
I agree now with another poster who stated that if some people
didn't hate cats, they would just hate something else.

Ignorance is bliss!

>
>>Cats are good!
>
>As are birds. 

There never was an argument on that! 
(Too bad I can't make such a unilateral statement about people.)

>Still waiting for that apology.

Don't hold your beak.  I'ld also like the person who said to shoot
cats to admit that they are wrong!

>
>If this discussion MUST continue in this vein, maybe it should mosey
>on over to alt.flame and do the rec.bird crowd a BIG favor.

How can an attempt to educate people be a flame war?  All in ones
perspective I suppose.

Denise "I like mohs all animals 'cept possums" Caire
denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM

denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) (12/07/89)

In article <941@wrgate.WR.TEK.COM> denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) writes:
>Hey, I already admitted that the joke was uncalled for, but it did
>startle you, didn't it?  That is exactly how I felt when shooting cats
>was suggested.  And I retaliated with a sick joke that wasn't in the
>least bit funny, and I knew that.
>
>I agree now with another poster who stated that if some people
>didn't hate cats, they would just hate something else.
>
>>>Cats are good.
>>As are birds. 
>
>There never was an argument on that! 
>(Too bad I can't make such a unilateral statement about people.)
>
>>Still waiting for that apology.
>
>Don't hold your beak.  I'ld also like the person who said to shoot
>cats to admit that they are wrong!

I went through the postings to find out who originally started this
discussion (if you can call it that) and imagine my surprise when I
find out that JIM KIMBALL was the one who openly promoted the blatant
killing of cats.  This person not only works for the same company as I
do, he also works at the same building site, Walker Road.

Jim, I have a bone to pick with you.  I naturally realize that although
you may have voiced this sentiment, that you are probably not alone in
thinking this way (erroneous as it were).  Can you admit that you were
wrong to advise people to "shoot " cats?

Although an out-an-out admittal of wrongness would be nice, I almost
prefer to meet in person so I can see who the adversary is.  How
about it?  You "game"?  I sure am.

Denise Caire (ext. 1846)

ooblick@intercon.com (Mikki Barry) (12/07/89)

In article <941@wrgate.WR.TEK.COM> denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) writes:
>I can't help but notice you along with Ed B., Mikki B., Mike M.,
>K. Sullivan, and who knows who all never address the fact that
>someone in this group said to shoot cats enticed to birds at feeders.

Excuse me?  I was calmly staying out of this one, waiting for it all
to blow over.  But not before I posted multiple pieces taking to task
those who advocated shooting cats.  I received quite a bit of flack
from people saying that cats are not entitled to roam on their property,
and citing various laws, etc. etc.  Perhaps you remember?

Let me offer a little bit of advice from a veteran of the net.
People will respond in kind.  If you accuse them of cruelty to their
cats by leaving them in the house, they will start to resent you.
If you continue by snide remarks, they will turn up the heat in kind.
If you then start name calling and then complain when others return
the favor, you will look like a hypocrite.

A very real danger in this forum is that the words stand alone,
without facial expressions, smiles, snickers, etc.  This makes
the net a place where ideas can easily be misconstrued by others,
and your reputation (if there can actually be one for a faceless
name floating down a telephone line) can be reduced to mud by just
a few postings.

Tenatiously holding out in a group where nobody wants to hear
what you are saying will also add to the cannon fodder that will be
flung in your direction.  and "you started it" cries don't help when
you are placed in everyone's kill file from Maine to Australia.

>How can an attempt to educate people be a flame war?  All in ones
>perspective I suppose.

Maybe that is part of the problem.  This IS a flame war.  Nobody wins.
"The last word" is a hollow victory at best.

Mikki Barry

mary@dinorah.wustl.edu (Mary E. Leibach) (12/09/89)

denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) writes:

>I can't help but notice you along with Ed B., Mikki B., Mike M.,
>K. Sullivan, and who knows who all never address the fact that
>someone in this group said to shoot cats enticed to birds at feeders.

I am afraid I never saw that particular article, only your references
to it.  I believe I said in a previous posting that I certainly do not
condone the shooting of cats.  

>From all the bad mouthing I've received in an open forum, I'ld say 
>this is an emotional issue.  Step back from your emotions and see
>the facts.  (I will be researching over my Christmas vacation).

You are right it is an emotional issue.  On the one hand, some person
suggested shooting cats, which other people love as part of their
family.  SOME cats do hunt and kill birds, which many people love.
That does not even count the after-the-fact mud slinging that has gone
on.  You are right, it is time for some apologies and some clearing of
heads.  On ALL sides.

>You, in the open forum, think you can shut me up and shoo me away
>because you don't want to open your eyes.  I will not be "crowed"
>into shutting up and if that "ruffles your feathers", then so be it.

Cute.  If it makes you feel better, I sincerely doubt you can be shut
up.  Censorship isn't desirable anyway.
  
>Hey, I already admitted that the joke was uncalled for, but it did
>startle you, didn't it?  That is exactly how I felt when shooting cats
>was suggested.  And I retaliated with a sick joke that wasn't in the
>least bit funny, and I knew that.

Understandable.  Your aim is very lousy though.  I was trying to see
things from your cat's point of view, not advocating shooting it.

>Well, as I have already suggested in a previous response, you could
>try supporting environmentally conscience groups (as I'm sure many of
>you do) instead of "sticking your heads in the sand" and saying that
>cats are bad.  (If you truely like cats, then "scratch" the last
>sentance).  

Like I said before, it was and is a good suggestion.  Having read many
stories about people being involved in rehab projects that take care
of injured birds, I think the net is with you on this one.

>I guess what really "sticks in my craw" is the fact that it is so easy
>to place a feeder where cats can't get to birds, why not do it?

The birds my mother feeds like to throw the seed on the ground and
then eat it.  Some birds are ground feeders.  Not to start a flame
war, or anything, but how do you deal with that?  And could someone
repost the suggestions on how to cat-proof the feeder?  I missed it.

>I agree now with another poster who stated that if some people
>didn't hate cats, they would just hate something else.

In the case of sicko people who get their kicks out of torturing cats
for fun, I heartily agree with you.  But there many bird lovers out
there that do not appreciate cats attacking birds.  True, cats are not
the only hazaards to birds.  But sometimes the big corporations with
their polution and ecological destruction seem so impossible to fight.
The neighbor's cat is within easy reach.  It is visible, it can be
driven off.  There are people who own these cats, not some big
corporation with an army of lawyers.  On top of all of that, the
article that triggered the whole thing dealt with cats.  In a month or
two, someone will want to be on the warpath against something else.

>Don't hold your beak.  I'ld also like the person who said to shoot
>cats to admit that they are wrong!

Fair enough.  I'd also like to see some such admission from them as
well.  This group has proven that there are more humane methods than
shooting, so gratutious violence is uncalled for.

>How can an attempt to educate people be a flame war?  All in ones
>perspective I suppose.

Not the education, that can stay here.  But name-calling and flames
should stop or move.  And I still think rec.pets is the best
net-resource to find out how to keep a cat in one's own yard.

>Denise "I like mohs all animals 'cept possums" Caire

Okay, what is so bad about possums.  'Cept of course that they are
ugly and feisty (IMHO)?  I don't advocate shooting them either.

	-Mary

scott@mccall.uucp (12/11/89)

In article <941@wrgate.WR.TEK.COM>, denise@dadla.WR.TEK.COM (Denise Caire) writes:
> 
> Don't hold your beak.  I'ld also like the person who said to shoot
> cats to admit that they are wrong!
> 
Flame on:
Hey, just where the hell have you been,  with "your head in the sand".
I wrote and told/asked you to take this conversation over to rec.pets.
I made a reply over there.  But I haven't had an answer yet.  I didn't
start the shoot cats line, but made a reply in anger.  If you would
have read my followup then you wouldn't be making another false
statement - 1st was that I'm a cat hater.  I'm trying to be "educated"
from you, but I guess you're ignoring me so "ignorance is bliss!"
according to you.  So don't try to educate me if you're not willing
to be yourself.  If you need smilies, put them here.
Flame off. 

I'm still willing to listen, talk, or discuss.
-- 
Scott Davis (800)255-2762, in Kansas (913)776-4041
The McCall Pattern Company, 615 McCall Rd., Manhattan, KS 66502, USA
UUCP: rutgers!ksuvax1!mccall!scott  Internet: scott%mccall@ksuvax1.cis.ksu.edu