I just took the opportunity of a cool break in the sprinkles to try another
shot at Jerry's "Hot and Cold" exercise, and hopefully not repeat the
mistakes he pointed out in my previous attempt.

First, I put on his collar, and let him out the door, with his usual
voluntary wait before heading down the steps. He assumed he was going for a
walk, so he once again started that way. I stopped a few feet away in a
clear area, and after a few attempts on his part to pull me along on "his"
walk, he allowed me to slacken the leash, and I started the exercise.

The first few times I told him "good boy", he reacted by looking toward me,
which I also responded to with immediate praise. Mostly, he stood looking
away, and a couple times when I said "good boy", he wagged his tail. After
a while, being sure to stay as immobile as possible, he just wandered
around near me, mostly looking in the trees or elsewhere. As instructed, I
continued to praise him, which he blew off, but he did stay close, and even
for a while sat on his own leash. Sometimes he walked behind me, perhaps
"guarding my rear", as a bodyguard might do. He did pay attention when I
pulled the paper with Jerry's instructions, but when I showed it to him he
determined it to be inedible and ignored further distraction. He would
sometimes show a little interest if I shifted my weight or turned around,
but he was clearly about as bored as I was. A couple times he rolled over
and waggled his paws in the air, possibly seeking attention or just glad to
be alive. I had to touch him briefly to untangle his leash after one of his
rolls, and he gave me eye contact at that time, as if to say "When do we
stop this foolishness and get on with my walk?" I persisted in this for at
least 20 minutes, and he never sat there looking at me, as was supposed to
happen.

So, Jerry, where did I go wrong this time? I don't want to proceed to other
exercises until we get this one down pat.

For all of you who are still munching your popcorn in the peanut gallery, I
hope you realize that I am conducting a scientific experiment here. Jerry
promises 100% success and nearly instant results. Maybe I'm still doing
something wrong, so he is welcome to let me know and correct it. If I
cannot get the results promised by following his instructions precisely,
then all of you may delight in his debunking, and he will no longer be able
to use 100%. But I sincerely hope I do succeed with Muttley.

Actually, I might be willing to take this experiment one step further. I
would propose that Jerry and I post half the cost of my airfare to visit
him in Florida with Muttley. If he can obtain the results he claims, I foot
the bill, and I have a trained dog. If not, he foots the bill, and can no
longer claim his absolute success guarantee. In any case, Muttley and I
will get a vacation to sunny Florida. But I would wait until at least
October for this, as I have been to Disney World in August, and it was Hell
on Earth!

Maybe this would be a good human interest item for Jay Leno or Conan or one
of the other late night or daytime gurus to present on their show. Can the
madman of Usenet train the most infamous dog/owner team?

Eagerly awaiting your replies, but now I gotta go play some beach
volleyball which I help organize on Fridays. And I gotta deal with off
leash dogs trying to eat the ball. Sheesh.

Paul and Muttley

In article ,
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
For all of you who are still munching your popcorn in the peanut gallery, I
hope you realize that I am conducting a scientific experiment here.

For whatever value of "science." I suppose the control
group is, um, ... would that be NOTHING?

Great engineering there, Paul!!!
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

"Melinda Shore" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
For all of you who are still munching your popcorn in the peanut gallery,
I
hope you realize that I am conducting a scientific experiment here.

For whatever value of "science." I suppose the control
group is, um, ... would that be NOTHING?

Great engineering there, Paul!!!

We're not talking about a statistical study, but a supposedly sure-fire
method that works for all dogs. Just like, if I buy a manufacturer's part,
connect it up according to the reference design, and plug it in, it better
work. If I build 100 of them, maybe one might not work, but Jerry's saying
100%.

So, yes, my "experiment" is valid. One failure is all it takes to discredit
the 100% claim. If that changes to, say, 95%, then we'd need a
statistically meaningful number. No control group is necessary, unless you
believe dogs train themselves. And we're not talking relative success rates
of different methods.

Paul and Muttley

On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 18:26:11 -0400, "Paul E. Schoen"
wrote:

I just took the opportunity of a cool break in the sprinkles to try another
shot at Jerry's "Hot and Cold" exercise, and hopefully not repeat the
mistakes he pointed out in my previous attempt.
[...]

Up to #1A already, EH?

Let's see, there's 26 letters in the English alphabet, so then what?

Start using Roman numerals?

I think you're probably going to need the Chinese alphabet before this
is all said and done.

Carry on, Garth!

--
Handsome Jack Morrison

Don't mess with old farts!
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286847,00.html

Free condoms for Mexico!
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=062807C

Immigration bill goes down in flames! Yip-ee-i-oh, yip-ee-i-ay!

Freakin' arrogant putas. spit

"Cloture Passes and I Re-assess My Patriotism"
http://shotsacrossthebow.com/archives/002724.html

Control-freaks from the "reality-based" community are at it again!
http://www.examiner.com/a-801194%7EG...alk_radio.html

Way to go, Vikings!
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/20...e-denmark.html

United States 2, Mexico 1
Too bad, muchachas putierrez! Better luck next time, putas!
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/24/sp...&oref=sl ogin

In article ,
Paul E. Schoen wrote:
We're not talking about a statistical study, but a supposedly sure-fire
method that works for all dogs.

You use the word "statistics" as if you understand what it
means, but apparently you don't. What you're proposing
isn't "science" although I guess it's a sign of the times
that you think it is.

I'm no Jerry fan (AS IF) but if your track record has any
predictive value whatsoever it looks very unlikely indeed
that you'll be able to follow Jerry's program closely enough
to be able to make any statement about it whatsoever. Or
any valid statement, that is - G-d knows that incompetence
and stupidity haven't encouraged you to keep quiet before.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

On Jun 29, 5:26?pm, "Paul E. Schoen" wrote:
Actually, I might be willing to take this experiment one step further. I
would propose that Jerry and I post half the cost of my airfare to visit
him in Florida with Muttley. If he can obtain the results he claims, I foot
the bill, and I have a trained dog. If not, he foots the bill, and can no
longer claim his absolute success guarantee. In any case, Muttley and I
will get a vacation to sunny Florida.
Paul and Muttley

OMG. This is great entertainment. I'm not a big fen of Da Boss but
Goddess help anyone who tries to help this fool.

on Sat, 30 Jun 2007 02:04:04 GMT, (Melinda Shore) wrote:

You use the word "statistics" as if you understand what it
means, but apparently you don't. What you're proposing
isn't "science" although I guess it's a sign of the times
that you think it is.

I'm no Jerry fan (AS IF) but if your track record has any
predictive value whatsoever it looks very unlikely indeed
that you'll be able to follow Jerry's program closely enough
to be able to make any statement about it whatsoever. Or
any valid statement, that is - G-d knows that incompetence
and stupidity haven't encouraged you to keep quiet before.

This is like watching a train wreck with a stadium full of cheering
onlookers.

--
Lynne

in thread . 97.142: Lynne
whittled the following words:


This is like watching a train wreck with a stadium full of cheering
onlookers.



This is like watching a train wreck with a stadium full of JEERING
onlookers.

In article 42,
Lynne wrote:
This is like watching a train wreck with a stadium full of cheering
onlookers.

One of the very first "look and feel" lawsuits was over
staged train crashes in the 19th century. Someone thought
somebody else's wrecks-for-show was too much like his own
wrecks-for-show and took the other guy to court.

Ob-rpdb: staged trainwrecks for show
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis -

Prouder than ever to be a member of the reality-based community

on Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:54:32 GMT, (Melinda Shore) wrote:

Ob-rpdb: staged trainwrecks for show

and that is the sound of the nail being hit on the head

--
Lynne