RetrieverTraining.Net - the RTF banner

Master National Discussion is pulled.

17K views 73 replies 38 participants last post by  Eric Johnson 
#1 ·
Dear RTF users,

Some lines were crossed. The thread is pulled.

  • Don't make it personal. Don't waste my time asking me to define this. Please. Debate the issue all you want, but don't make it personal.
  • If you want to ask someone who posts by a handle their name, feel free. But if they choose not to answer, let it go. Do not post real names and photos of folks who clearly choose to not be publicly identified.

It's the same old stuff guys and gals. I've not had to post this for a long, long time. Just treat others when you write, the way you'd like to be treated. Please.

Have a great weekend.

Thanks, Chris

P.S. feel free to discuss the MN topic more if you choose. Just adhere to the above. A few of your peers ruined that other thread for all. I'm not going to take the time to manually pick through and clean it up. It's gone.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Chris, I hadn't checked the thread you referenced since earlier this morning, so may not be aware of the offenses you referenced, but I do know it was getting a bit chippy and personal. Unfortunately, this is a pretty prominent issue at the moment and I thought the discussion and various solutions proposed were worthwhile. I know you don't have the time to sift through all the good posts to cull the bad, but I find it unfortunate that we lost the productive part of the discussion because of a few bad apples that would rather point fingers than focus on the issue and realistic possibilities to resolve it. I was hoping a proposal could be crafted from many of the ideas presented. If there's any way to restore part of the discussion, it would likely be appreciated by many.

Thanks,
 
#3 · (Edited)
The discussion was worth keeping, I have no stake in this but just because a couple of people had a disagreement does not mean the discussion should be terminated.

Punish the one who questions the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with him but not the entire community.
 
#40 ·
the discussion was worth keeping, i have no stake in this but just because a couple of people had a disagreement does not mean the discussion should be terminated.

Punish the one who questions the intelligence of anyone who disagrees with him but not the entire community.
I agree , those that get ugly put themselves out there as just that.
 
#4 ·
I had been following this thread pretty closely but I too missed the nasty stuff. For the most part there were some good suggestions and discussions. I wish some people would get past the name calling so these kinds of discussions can happen. It is perfectly fine to disagree about things.

Dawn
 
#5 ·
Dang I must have missed something? I thought there was a good discussion going on.
I agree with Ed. Pull out whatever was wrong if you have to but the discussion was worth continuing.
 
#6 ·
When posters go off the reservation and put the resource at risk, I don't think it should be Chris' responsibility to take time from his weekend to sift through the thread to eliminate the garbage.
 
#7 ·
Pretty sad if threads can get pulled because one person gets out of hand. Way to much valuable information to let that happen.
 
#11 ·
Exactly. Punish the offender not the masses
 
#8 ·
We've had this conversation before.

When a thread has posts that are questionable, remove the posts. When a thread has a person or persons who act out, remove them for a set period ... time out of you will. I would suggest something like first a warning and then .... 2 days for the first subsequent offense, a week for the second subsequent offense, and a full 30 days for each subsequent offense. This is a well honored method of dealing with bad actors on bulletin boards and has worked very well for years in some really contentious settings.

There's no reason to, in effect, punish all because of the postings of one or a few.
 
#10 ·
Why don't the powers that be acknowledge the fact that there are pros and ams in the hunt test game and split it like the field trials?

Have an Open Master and an Am Master flight.

Do the same with the Master National: have the AM MN in the spring and the Open MN in the Fall.
 
#15 ·
Why don't the powers that be acknowledge the fact that there are pros and ams in the hunt test game and split it like the field trials?

Have an Open Master and an Am Master flight.

Do the same with the Master National: have the AM MN in the spring and the Open MN in the Fall.
I think the HT game is trying to limit entries not multiply stakes? And theres no competition so why have an am and an open, it's a standard correct? FTer regards:)
 
#12 ·
I'll agree with pulling the entire thread. Censoring specific posts almost never works not to mention the amount of work required by Chris. Just as easy to start a new thread to document the useful parts. .02
 
#13 ·
If I was Chris , I'd say to myself... Self ,What should I do now? Go training ,spend time with the family or pump out the sewer ????? Since pumping out the sewer didn't seem like much fun , he opted for the other 2.... Now you know why the thread was deleted....Wading thru the Sh** isn't much fun.
 
#14 ·
Why don't hunt tests adopt the same format as trials. Have an open master and amateur master. Each pass is worth a point and it takes 6 points to qualify for the master. Have an open master national and an amateur master national. That would cut the numbers for each master national as well as let both the pros and am have a venue that they can run. If an am wants to run the open they can and can qualify for the open master national.

This is not my idea but I thought it was a good one.

Russell
 
#16 ·
It might do some of you well to remember that Chris provides this resource to you for use free of charge, and ultimately, may run it as he sees fit. He could wake tomorrow and decide none of the back-seat driving and baby-sitting he continually endures here is worth it, and dump the whole thing.
Wow that statement is original.:rolleyes:
 
#17 ·
Whether original or not, it is accurate.
 
#18 ·
WTH Corey! Maybe you should start a page that you are the janitor for....
 
#44 ·
who died and left you in charge. My opinions are just that. If you don't like em why don't you go start your own forum and I promise to stay away.
 
#19 ·
Chris has the right to remove any threat, in his opinion needs removed. It is his game, his rules. Violate his rules and he will clean house.

As for the thread. I still do not understand the passion against pros running hunt test.

If you want to compete, run field trials. If you want to test your dogs abilities run hunt test. Pro or Am is irrelevant. I ran hunt test as an amateur and I have run hunt test as a pro. I have run qualifying's as as amateur and I have run qualifying's as a pro. All are fun.

This whole amateur/pro problem at hunt test is really over hyped, my opinion. Since Hunt Tests are testing you and your dogs abilities against the standard why do you care if a pro runs before you or after you. I have had Amateurs run before me that smoked a test. I applauded their performance and moved to the line. The judges forgot their work once they moved off the line and I moved on the line. Standard not competing.

Have a blessed day

Richard
 
#73 ·
As for the thread. I still do not understand the passion against pros running hunt test.

If you want to compete, run field trials. If you want to test your dogs abilities run hunt test. Pro or Am is irrelevant. I ran hunt test as an amateur and I have run hunt test as a pro. I have run qualifying's as as amateur and I have run qualifying's as a pro. All are fun.



Richard
Richard, I believe you misunderstand the issue. There isn't any passion against pros running Hunt Tests.
The passion comes from the fact that pros are filling up most if not all of the spots available; thereby denying tha Amateur even a chance to enter and run. I could care less if I run a Master test with 120 dogs and all of them are Am trained and run or if all but mine are Pro trained. I just want a fair chance for everyone to get dogs entered.

Of all the proposals put forth I think the one from Ted Shih: whereby everybody can initially enter up to 5 dogs. Then after a certain time where everyone has had time to get up to 5 dogs entered, it would open back up to enter additional dogs, has the most merit

At our clubs last Hunt Test the entry was limited to 60 dogs. It filled up in less than an hour and before I was even aware it was open for entries. Two Pros had 50 dogs entered. I believe there were only three Ams who got entered
I, along with everyone else who was on the Hunt Test Committee and who worked the trial, was not able to enter and run our own dogs. In your own words you said "ALL ARE FUN" The passion comes from the new rules serving to deny us even the chance to enter and have that fun

In essence we all got to spend our Memorial day weekend being unpaid workers. We love the games and know that it entails a lot of work. However the love of the game comes from training and running our dogs; not from being an unpaid {and Unthanked} volunteer to put on a test so a couple of pros can run their dogs and make a living.

Speaking for myself only, but that one lesson is all I need. I will never be on a Hunt Test Committee and serve as free help again {without an opportunity to run dogs} again until an equitable solution is found. The club at present does not have a Hunt Test scheduled for this year.
 
#20 ·
All this talk about having an Open and and Amateur.... just look at another thread and read about how its hard to get enough volunteers to work at a test. I can just see ALL the volunteers running into work an Open test....:rolleyes:
 
#21 ·
Russ, Ed, Corey, Eric,

I'm not going to try to change any of your opinions. You are entitled to them.

I think that most if not all of you would view this differently if you were in my shoes.

To all:

The reason I made this thread, and the reason I left the "moved" notation on the board was to make it publicly clear that I removed the thread and why. I also made it clear how users can conduct themselves so that this does not happen again.

Every one of us has the ability to help self-regulate this culture and keep it on track. We knowingly conduct ourselves in a way that retains the value of the discussion and eliminates the threat against this resource, we keep things moving ahead.

I put plenty of time into this site as it is. I see no clean way to hand pick the "offensive" stuff, without creating even more complaining. I've done it before in the past and had limited success. I've also taken the position of deleting every post after a certain point in time. That has also lead to even more hard feelings. I've found it is best to:

A) have the offending party delete or edit. OR

B) remove the entire thread.

You are all welcome to resume discussion of the topic. Keep it dirty side down and clean side up...please.

I'm confident that all who are passionate and with good ideas and solutions will understand the logic and will take the time to implement their ideas in ways that can create positive change. Frankly, anybody who wants to say that the solution was on an RTF discussion, but it is lost forever because Chris pulled the post, is being unrealistic.

I hope you all enjoy your Sunday and have a productive new week.

Chris

Oh, we also have one more former RTF user now on the "read only" list.
 
#22 ·
Chris, I concur that deleting the thread was the most prudent decision for you. I did not think that one person crossing the line of civility was that bad but I'm just a guy hanging out in the peanut gallery.
 
#23 ·
Thanks Ed, you'd see it quite differently if you were here in the janitor's closet. I didn't pull it because of how "mean" or "bad" the specific writing on the thread was. I pulled it because of some perceived threats and the impacts of those threats on my calendar and pocket. :cool:

Not sure if that makes sense. I don't have the time to put my schedule and cashflow at risk so that someone else can treat folks on on the internet hatefully.

Corey should remember too. Years ago we had another person making some threats due to things he had written. It was out of that live dialogue that a personal friendship developed.

Chris
 
#24 ·
Are we talking about the thread relating to hunt tests filling up too fast?? I must have missed the posts that were offensive.

Regarding the suggestions on this thread to try an Open Master and an Amateur Master, how would that solve anything? Don't most of the clubs that limit entries do so because they don't have the manpower to hold multiple stakes?

JS
 
#25 ·
Chris, thanks for all you do for RTF. I, as well as others, appreciate it.

Regarding limited entries in Masters, I hope someone comes up with a solution before I get to that point with my dog ... but it'll be a while.
 
#29 ·
Everyone keeps talking about manpower. I don't perceive that as the problem at all. Most tests that I have been to pay bird boys or get them free in many instances. I have seen local FFA, boy scout troops, prison trustees and many other forms of getting enough people to run a test. I believe that where the problem lies is getting enough grounds to hold more stakes. IMO even if every single person at the test volunteered their time we still wouldn't solve the problem.
 
#34 ·
Corey,

Your first paragraph about losing the passion is also applicable for me with running this resource.

Frankly, I sometimes feel like folks enjoy sniping at me and what I do...sometimes here, sometimes in their own little groups. I don't expect everybody to like me. I don't expect everybody to agree with me.

But I tend to lose some passion about running this thing sometimes when the sniping comes up. For the most part, I've dealt with those individuals privately - frequently over the phone. Many times, it results in some cooperation. Not always.

But I get it.

Hey, it comes with the territory. But this weekend is the first bare ground we've seen in weeks. And rather than training dogs, I've found myself spending more time on here - not for fun reasons - than I'd like.

Headed out the door now, in fact.

Chris
 
#46 ·
Corey,

Frankly, I sometimes feel like folks enjoy sniping at me and what I do...sometimes here, sometimes in their own little groups. I don't expect everybody to like me. I don't expect everybody to agree with me.

Chris
But I love ya buddy. I don't agree with you always but the I don't agree with myself sometimes. I don't snipe at you anymore than I do anyone, hell you are actually way down the list of people I screw with. If I meant anything by it you would know it.
 
#35 ·
I certainly hope that anyone that has ever threatened you with legal issues has lost their ability to read and post on this forum. Like Ed, it's your park, I just like to play on the merry go round. It's just that I am not a fan of just taking the swing set away when the bully is shoving the good kids off of it.
 
#37 ·
when you take to posting on the internet, you do so a your own peril. If people think they are truely anonymous, they are only kidding themselves. It doesn't take much to figure out who they are. To cry foul is ludicrous.

Some of us have stepped up and told Chris in the past that he would be defended pro bono ...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top