Re: Raw food for pets?

i.m.lurker@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:51:05 -0400, Tara Green
<jellybeancomfort@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

i.m.lurker@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:48:42 -0400, Tara Green
<jellybeancomfort@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

i.m.lurker@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009 22:23:31 -0400, Tara Green
<jellybeancomfort@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

i.m.lurker@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
unless chardonnay9 is actually right
about you.
You know what?

You're on your own now.

There was no need to pull that one out and prance it around.

Argue with her all you want as far as I'm concerned. I know I pull her out of the bozo bin to knock around from time to time.

But to lend credibility to all the supremely nasty things she's said simply because you didn't like a snark? Whatever....
Thanks, but I've been on my own for quite some time, and I prefer to
make my own way. I'm flattered you think I could in some way lend
credibility to what chardonnay9 says here, but at the same time, I'm
sure that you must realize how silly that sounds. Chardonnay9 speaks
for herself, as do I, and as do you.
If it "sounds silly" then why would you even bring up someone else's opinion of another poster. That contradiction is pretty glaring.
Why I do or don't do something should be of no interest to you. At
least I can't imagine why it should.

When you say something, and people read it, they are likely to form opinions, make assessments, or even simply question (in much the same way you yourself do) when someone comes up with something so incredibly hypocritical.

Sort of the way you did with other people's posts just today in fact.

Can't imagine why their posts would have been of any interest to you either, and yet you replied.

I replied, but please notice that I haven't tried to tell anyone who
they should reply to, how they should reply, etc.,

That sounds GREAT. Too bad you show just how untrue that is in this very post (and not for the first time)

or that you should
care about what I think about you. Because you shouldn't. I can't
stop people from forming opinions, but just because one is free to
form one doesn't mean that it's always necessary to express it,
especially here, and particularly if it doesn't add anything positive
to a discussion.

Like this post I'm replying to? Or did you only mean mine? Because we're pretty much doing the same thing in this exchange, but only one of us is pretending not to be.

Or are we playing the feigning a lack of interest and being above it all now? How goofy. Especially starting it so soon after you responded to a few snarks from others.

I have no interest in what makes you tick. That's between you and your
therapist.


How great! You cared enough to go for the low blow personal and snide comment!

Very special!

And I care nothing about your opinions, yet you appear to
be rather incapable of preventing yourself from expressing them,

Wait, you mean like this post from you? Or are we only insulting me and my choices, while yours are stellar?

I'm really trying to follow, but the irony is weighing me down at the moment.

especially to me. Why not express them to those who might actually be
interested in hearing them? If they are actually worthy of
consideration, you should have no trouble finding willing listeners.

While your overall answer sounds good, that basic inconsistency renders your post pretty disingenuous at best.
Your opinion of my posts means nothing to me.
That makes no difference in whether or not I will choose to state it.

Of course, but please have no pretense that I care what they are.

Why would you think that your caring is relevant at all?

That's life in usenet....and its just grand.

Not exactly. A lot of it, maybe most of it, is utter nonsense,
perpetuated by people who feel it's their duty to get everyone
marching in lockstep. For example, telling people who they can reply
to, harassing the rebellious, and singling out certain individuals for
abuse. This newsgroup is a perfect example of it.

Ah. great drama.

This newsgroup has some of that. Sure.

And you yourself display some of that same stuff when it suits you as well.

There is also a lot of great information here as well as valuable help, just as I'm sure you're capable of sharing as well.

No one really fits into a box. No one I know of in this group does, and I'm assuming neither do you.

But what a fun way of trying to hold up rpdh as exemplifying the very worst of usenet!

And I can't imagine why
you would think it would.
I can't imagine why someone with so little interest would even take the time tp type all about how little interest they have.

Must be thet "I'm going to be above it all and tell everyone how much I don't care"

Seriously....you're being ruder to me (who wasn't actually snarking on you) than you are to Chard who has ripped you an ***.

Interesting choice.

Chardonnay9 has done no such thing to me. She called me a puppet.
That doesn't bother me at all. On the other hand, you've done pretty
much exactly what you've accused chardonnay9 of doing,

To you? Before or after your passive aggressive snarks?

Prior to your own shaded entries, I did no such thing. And even now, I have not made a personally snide comment about anything other than your own words and actions *in this group*. Your life offline (real or imagined, though I wouldn't really imagine anything about you)is not something I would ever get snide about....and yet you're comfortable going there. So be it.

But feel free to provide a cite, and if true, I'd be happy to make amends. Otherwise, I'm not all that interested in your vague accusations.

and for no
apparent reason. Yes, for some reason or reasons still unknown to me,
you think you're qualified to critique my posts,

Really?
So, to you pointing out an action is synonymous with critiquing? No, wait....that's only when *others* do it.

You point out actions....often in fact. But when others do it, its not ok.

I think I'm starting to get the rules here.

But really, we all have a different style. Some are direct. Others are passive-aggressive. Pretending to not be doing what you criticize makes you, what?....just like the rest of us, I guess. Just another pig in the mud.

warn me about
chardonnay9's dangerous ideas,

I'm curious about when I did that.

Since I don't tend to say things like "Chard has dangerous ideas" I think you may have pulled that one out of nowhere.

I do tend to warn people about her dangerous advice, when she has actually *given* dangerous advice, though I doubt that would have come up with you since she wasn't giving you advice.

Its extremely likely that I pointed out that you weren't going to be changing the nature of her advice anytime soon....and that seems to be panning out nicely as far as I can see.

But warning you about her "dangerous ideas"? Don't think so.

I'd suggest that you aim for more accuracy, but while suggestions emanating *from* you are fine, the ones headed towards you seem to trigger accusations of being "overly concerned" or "critiquing", so I'll just point out that you're being incredibly inaccurate here.

think I should care about your
opinions,

Nope. I think no such thing.

People post. Usenet is not a medium for personal and private conversations. Each post reaches a wide array of folks. Just because your post was what is being responded to doesn't make you or your level of concern critical....or even a factor.

and are apparently overly concerned about why I may or may
not do something here.

There's that "overly concerned". How cute.

You could disrobe and dance around naked in front of your neighbors singing LL Cool J songs and it wouldn't register on my radar.

Try not to confuse a reply to you with actually caring a lot about what you do.

Oh, there's that evil suggestion thing again.

Your strategy, much like chardonnay9's, is
seriously flawed, if it is actually intended to influence others in a
positive way.

I'm not trying to influence you at all.

Did you think I was?

A suggestion or comment is merely that. They can fall flat, be appreciated, or left alone to gather dust. The result makes no difference. I think its interesting that you equate typing a post with all this concern over your thoughts and level of care.

Maybe it's time to rethink your technique?

Heyyyyyy! Didn't you start this very post with the reason your posts were so above all others is because you never do this sort of thing?

I'm so disappointed in you. I was about to crown you the new queen of positive usenet posts.
.

Loading