In article ,
Handsome Jack Morrison
wrote:

Dear Jack,

Having just typed an extensive and detailed response to your post, I
have come to the conclusion that I'm already tired of going back and
forth over what is really a trivial issue. I'll just sum up:

* A person of normal intelligence obtaining advice from a training book
but otherwise living in a training vacuum can easily fall into the trap
of doing stupid **** because an expert author made it sound normal and
accepted. Please note that I don't claim that said author promoted doing
stupid ****, but rather that the author's every nuance and intention
cannot be conveyed in print alone which leads to ambiguities and
misdirection.

* As I see it, if the training book in question advocates collar
corrections and dominance-based discipline, then the resulting stupid
**** could conceivably comprise over-done corrections and inappropriate
"disciplinary" actions. If the training book in question advocates food
rewards and permissiveness, then the stupid **** might be failing to set
boundaries and guidelines, and/or continuing to bribe good behavior out
of the dog. Both (unintended) consequences are detrimental to the dog
but the former could seriously fracture the dog-owner relationship while
the latter could just get you a bratty little pest.

* I don't advocate censoring anything in writing, especially dog
training books. Your insistence that I do smacks of paranoia about some
kind of PP/clicker training conspiracy. Oh, and sorry that you
misinterpreted my jovial "Dude" exclamation--things don't always come
across the way they're meant, do they?

You folks are totally weird.

You folks are a bit strange as well.

Best wishes,
Alison in OH