Sandy in OK wrote:


But the fact is, I don't know any legitimate trainers who call
themselves "purely positive" do you? I certainly don't consider myself
to be one. I think it's one of those "strawman" arguments you keep
going on and on about. If you consider that belittling how it is used.
I guess so. I find the use of it disingenous.


Haven't followed this whole thread--I'm swamped. But IIRC the term,
and the aggravation associated with it, has a lot to do with some
individuals who were on here for awhile, calling everyone else a lot
of names, advocating what seemed to be an ideologically-pure,
reward-only form of training. Their evident desire to impose their
views on everyone and the low standards they had for their dogs'
behavior and training were part of the picture.

I think any time someone comes on and appears to promote strongly
reinforcement-based training, many of us tend to associate them with
those harangues--and what appeared to be unrealistic views of dogs
and their capabilities.

FWIW I am on another list one of whose members claims to use
no P+. Other members have seen her dogs work and say they
are highly trained, the methods they've seen are what she's stated
they are, and she appears to have good enough self-knowledge not
to be deceiving herself about what she does (I mention that because
I've known a lot of people who say they never do X, and they
appear to believe it, and they darned well *do* do X).

Amy dAhl