# Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff



## Guest

Anyone hear from these two as of late? Hope they are doing well.


----------



## Nicole Stark

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

No, not directly. I've seen Jeff around but haven't talked to him. I don't have a way to contact Gerry directly so I haven't been in contact with him either.


----------



## Alison Grubb

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I see Jeff O posting on facebook.
He's alive and kicking...and sarcastic as hell still.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

? did Gerr actually train dogs, out of all his posts i don't think i ever saw a reference to dog training. don't get me wrong i thought he was funny and witty as sh!t just never heard him say anything about dogs os dog training in the posts i read.


----------



## Guest

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> ? did Gerr actually train dogs, out of all his posts i don't think i ever saw a reference to dog training. don't get me wrong i thought he was funny and witty as sh!t just never heard him say anything about dogs os dog training in the posts i read.


 
Thats not for me to answer, but cmon, half the people on here have BS profiles and talk the almighty talk, probably never did shit. But its the internet we can all be professionals


----------



## Nicole Stark

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> ? did Gerr actually train dogs, out of all his posts i don't think i ever saw a reference to dog training. don't get me wrong i thought he was funny and witty as sh!t just never heard him say anything about dogs os dog training in the posts i read.


Peter, relative to training it's not what Gerry said that was always relevant but often what he didn't say that made his posts interesting.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

totally agree i am definately bigger and better on the internet than anything in real life - thats why the internets fun.

my question was purely out of interest - what did the guy actually do (training wise) - tried asking him but never found out. as i said i think the guy was funny and witty even when i was on the receiving end - in no way agree with what he said to bob though - that was poor character IMO


----------



## Thomas Jones

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

The grated bridge dog made me. I lol'd. Along with the aftermath that ensued


----------



## leslie cassian

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I miss Jeff. Seems to a be a lot more stupid pet questions since he got the boot. We need someone to cull the weak and run the curs. 

Kinda miss Gerry, too. He always had something witty or stupid or irrelevant to add, though seems he went a bit off the deepend before he got banned.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



leslie cassian said:


> I miss Jeff. Seems to a be a lot more stupid pet questions since he got the boot. We need someone to cull the weak and run the curs.


Hi Leslie

Jeff is the reason that Jeff is no longer on the list. He got away with a lot and was cut a lot of slack, but you can only push the
moderators/ owners so far.
He just didn't know when to STFU :-(

You're right, there are way too many stupid pet questions and
noob's with too much attitude that they haven't earned.


----------



## leslie cassian

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I know, Jeff was the author of his own misfortune, and I wish he could have reined himself in a bit.


----------



## Brian Hicks

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Thomas Barriano said:


> You're right, there are way too many stupid pet questions and
> noob's with too much attitude that they haven't earned.


Thats laughable. How does a noob "earn" an attitude on an internet forum? Get real Thomas, i'm sure the internet is the only place you have such high status..


----------



## Matt Grosch

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

was waiting for info like at the end of fast times at ridgemont high


----------



## Daryl Ehret

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I'm hardly here at all anymore, since Jeff left. Too dull. He's made no mention of catastrophic events.


----------



## rick smith

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

ridgemont high just rang a bell !!!

long and barely dog related but since i just flashed on it here goes :
and this is a no shitter 
way before i ever alpha rolled a hyena, i was in Hollywood.....on the tube and got paid for it,,,,even got outa school a few days while they shot it 
- Ozzie and Harriet -
most of you will have to do some net surfing to even know what the show was, but it was a biggy in my days 
- someone had a "connection" and our whole Pop Warner football team was picked to do a show.....shot it at Griffith Park...took three days and even had to get a SAG card  .... think I (or rather my parents) made 30-40 bucks total, but all i remember was it was "BIG bucks" 
- only problem was the show was about a girl who got on the team and disguised as one of the guys, and since she was the QB, and that was MY position, I was not in the show as much as all the other guys on the team were ... bummer :-(((((
- had i gotten more air time i'm sure i would have been "discovered" and never woulda had to join the navy 

- dog related....when we went to the studio to watch the preview b4 it was actually shown on TV, they took us around for a tour and I remember that it was weird that the whole Jack Lalane set had mini furniture in it to make him look bigger on the tube, and for some reason i think he had a dog hanging around with him, but i'm a little foggy on that part

- but if anyone knows of a way to dig up copies of those old TV shows out of the archives anywhere, pleese drop me a line so i can try to find my screen debut.....but since that show ran a long time so it might take a while to dig up mine :-(

...sorry for the interruption - back to regular programming


----------



## Randy Allen

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

The thing is Thomas; if all the noob's (is that the right acronym?) get run out for asking newbie questions; weather it's asked without forethought or not knowing enough to use a search function, then this site or any other just becomes one big circle jerk.

If you're at a/your club and see a handler making a novice mistake, do you go all stupid and berate him for doing something so assinine? Running him off the field telling him to smarten up and don't come back?
If so, then you're part of why dog sports have taken so long to gain any traction in N. America. Really who needs it, it's suppose to be fun.

If you don't feel a question or discussion is worthy of your consideration then move on. It's easy, there's lots of topics around here.


----------



## Thomas Jones

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Thomas Barriano said:


> Hi Leslie
> 
> Jeff is the reason that Jeff is no longer on the list. He got away with a lot and was cut a lot of slack, but you can only push the
> moderators/ owners so far.
> He just didn't know when to STFU :-(
> 
> You're right, there are way too many stupid pet questions and
> noob's with too much attitude that they haven't earned.












Jeff was kind of alright. Sometimes he would really come up with some good stuff. I'm going to do my kennels the way he talked about on here one time.

Gerry. meh. He wasn't that great. I wonder if he really owned a dog. He never said anything about dogs in his posts and he really put his foot in his mouth with the nervebag 1 year old dog that freaked out going over the grated bridge.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Randy Allen said:


> The thing is Thomas; if all the noob's (is that the right acronym?) get run out for asking newbie questions; weather it's asked without forethought or not knowing enough to use a search function, then this site or any other just becomes one big circle jerk.
> 
> If you're at a/your club and see a handler making a novice mistake, do you go all stupid and berate him for doing something so assinine? Running him off the field telling him to smarten up and don't come back?
> If so, then you're part of why dog sports have taken so long to gain any traction in N. America. Really who needs it, it's suppose to be fun.
> 
> If you don't feel a question or discussion is worthy of your consideration then move on. It's easy, there's lots of topics around here.


Hey Randy

I have no problem with NOOB's and their questions. As long as they can take a little good natured ribbing along with the answers. I rarely give a noob a hard time. It's just when one of them gets all nasty and demanding that I have a problem.
I "move on" a lot lately 
This is the WORKING Dog Forum. I'd like to see less pet dog questions.


----------



## Michelle Reusser

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Jeff just recently got himself booted from the PDB. He's still around other places, just had a GSD litter a few weeks ago.


----------



## Dave Colborn

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Thomas Jones said:


> Jeff was kind of alright. Sometimes he would really come up with some good stuff. I'm going to do my kennels the way he talked about on here one time.
> 
> Gerry. meh. He wasn't that great. I wonder if he really owned a dog. He never said anything about dogs in his posts and he really put his foot in his mouth with the nervebag 1 year old dog that freaked out going over the grated bridge.



How are you going to do your kennels? I am getting ready to do some more.


----------



## Thomas Jones

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Dave Colborn said:


> How are you going to do your kennels? I am getting ready to do some more.


http://www.ehow.com/how_6396124_make-mix-dog-kennel-floor.html


----------



## Randy Allen

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Hear hear Thomas,
It is a Working Dog Forum, as headed. Though maybe I'm not searching closely enough I don't see a lot of pet questions out there. Some inane questions, and some that aren't even worth the read through, but straight ahead pet questions? Haven't found any.
I stand corrected if I'm wrong.

As we're missing and somewhat lamenting people gone, I miss Jim Nash. He always gave good direction with just that little rub of salt in the wound so one would remember the lesson.
He didn't run people off the field without real cause.


----------



## Harry Keely

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Couldnt tell ya about Gerry, but Jeff O is breathing, hes got a couple of pups for sale out of his FR3 male GSD. I try not to pop on here to much anymore myself:-\", but still do occasionally and figure I would respond to this thread.


----------



## Randy Allen

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Just came back from the taking the dogs out and giving some more thought.
Thomas, to your sentiment of attidute. 
I must agree. I'm sure I know the thread you're refering to and it did get out of hand because of the op, even if I think Rick was just having a bad day ( he does as rule measure his answers real well (shrug, it happens with the best)) the op did not read closely enough to the questions needing to be addressed.
Copping an attidute with someone that has decades more experience does little for expanding ones knowledge.


----------



## Randy Allen

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Yo Rick,
I remember some of that stuff, they always ended the show with Rick's latest. These will take you back:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLkCWT2neuI&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=diH71kQNna8&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y98q1KzF7Ic&feature=related

Did your skit evolve around David and football or Ricky?
Any ways, here's more Ricky;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hrwJvdPtwI&feature=related

Salute...


----------



## rick smith

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Randy
thanks a LOT !!!!!!
Poor Little Fool actually gave me goosebumps  been a LONG time since I heard that and it was always a favorite !!!!

I remember that Ricky was there a lot more than Dave and a really cool guy compared to Dave just kinda being a "good guy"; i don't remember much about him.......i as too young to be star struck; just loved the getting outa school bit and thot it was cool that we "had" to spend a little time with a "screen teacher" for missed school time doing nothing 
- hate to say it, but i was so in to watching us and our team and the cute blonde girl (she was a real actor) hanging around that i don't remember too much more of the actual plot......and she was there at the screening too, but not too friendly with us peons as i remember.....Ricky and Dave actually did hang around with us tho.......Ozzie was just like the "dad" he portrayed on the set !
- the way they shoot, all it seemed like was three REALLY hot days running the same plays over and over again


----------



## Sara Waters

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Randy Allen said:


> Copping an attidute with someone that has decades more experience does little for expanding ones knowledge.


Depends, the 2 most talented handlers I personally know - one is over 50 and one is 25 yo. Number of posts on an internet forum doesnt make someone an authority or a good handler, neither do years neccessarily.


----------



## Randy Allen

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Aah shucks, ya got me there Sara.
But ya know the same thing can be said for the some unremitent straight ahead constant a**hole. Just because theyre a**holes, that doesn't make them some kind of all wise guru.


----------



## David Ruby

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

OT, but whatever happened to Woody that used to post here "back in the day"?

-Cheers


----------



## maggie fraser

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

You're all missing the whole point of this thread .

Just look at some of the replies.... what a bunch of bland and up your arse losers! No character, no personality...hey, why don't we just kick in a yahoo answers style for the seeming majority on here now. After all....all you need are questions and answers don't you ??? 

You just don't get it do you ?

I'm seriously peed off they're no longer here, I just hope they're making someone else happy wherever they are, I miss them !


----------



## Christopher Jones

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I heard they got married and moved to Florida. But that could just be a rumour.


----------



## Sara Waters

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



maggie fraser said:


> I'm seriously peed off they're no longer here, I just hope they're making someone else happy wherever they are, I miss them !


 
I tend to agree lol.


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



maggie fraser said:


> I'm seriously peed off they're no longer here, I just hope they're making someone else happy wherever they are, I miss them !


I'm sure someone here knows where they are posting now, and would be happy to pass that information on to you.


----------



## Lee H Sternberg

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Kadi Thingvall said:


> I'm sure someone here knows where they are posting now, and would be happy to pass that information on to you.


I'm just glad it is NOT that big forum in the sky!:-D


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

The way these threads keep popping up, you'd think it was the big forum in the sky. Funny how character/personality equals the ability to insult or heightened rebellion. Never mind, the one had zero dog training content or fulfilled the almighty sacred video requirement. But he gets a pass vs. run the newbie off the board with a dog training question mentality. If you want to follow Jeff's training/dogs, he has a web site and he loves video so I bet a YouTube search will get you updates. But really, I'm sure both can be found somewhere on the net and with a little research, I bet you can come up with a phone number. That way you can have your own private audience without "thou shall learn to communicate with common decency and respect" internet/mod/board rules. 


Terrasita


----------



## Chris McDonald

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I have no idea why Gerry got the boot, can someone PM me the link or the sentence or two that got him the boot? Just want to see what it takes to get executed around here.


----------



## brad robert

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



maggie fraser said:


> You're all missing the whole point of this thread .
> 
> Just look at some of the replies.... what a bunch of bland and up your arse losers! No character, no personality...hey, why don't we just kick in a yahoo answers style for the seeming majority on here now. After all....all you need are questions and answers don't you ???
> 
> You just don't get it do you ?
> 
> I'm seriously peed off they're no longer here, I just hope they're making someone else happy wherever they are, I miss them !


And your a ball of laughs!

Are you a suck up or do you have a "thing" for them cause your admiration is gay.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Chris McDonald said:


> I have no idea why Gerry got the boot, can someone PM me the link or the sentence or two that got him the boot? Just want to see what it takes to get executed around here.


All you have to do is click on "find more posts by" under the member's avatar on any of his messages and read the final couple.

Or:

http://www.workingdogforum.com/vBul...ar-dog-handlers-21041/index17.html#post286990

Post 166 here quotes Gerry's own decision not to grace the board with his presence any more.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



David Ruby said:


> OT, but whatever happened to Woody that used to post here "back in the day"?
> 
> -Cheers


Woody was a mod. 

I miss him. 

His work started taking too much time and he couldn't devote the time to WDF that he had been doing. 

I know lots of us hoped for a long time that he would change his mind!


----------



## susan tuck

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> Woody was a mod.
> 
> I miss him.
> 
> His work started taking too much time and he couldn't devote the time to WDF that he had been doing.
> 
> I know lots of us hoped for a long time that he would change his mind!


Woody was a damn fine mod, with a well developed wit. I miss him too.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



susan tuck said:


> Woody was a damn fine mod, with a well developed wit. I miss him too.


That's what I miss so much -- he's funny as heck!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> Woody was a mod.
> 
> I miss him.
> 
> His work started taking too much time and he couldn't devote the time to WDF that he had been doing.
> 
> I know lots of us hoped for a long time that he would change his mind!


I thought Woody owned the list before Mike S?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Thomas Barriano said:


> I thought Woody owned the list before Mike S?


No, no one before Mike.


----------



## Bob Scott

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Woody rocked!


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Bob Scott said:


> Woody rocked!


NO lie, just look what we're stuck with now?


----------



## Bob Scott

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Thomas Barriano said:


> NO lie, just look what we're stuck with now?



:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:........ :-k.........HEY!


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

no matter who was mod someone would have a problem with something sometime - thats life for anyone in any leadership type role. 

on the WDF mods have to be more like parents than anything else - on average the mods work hard and get it right for the most, most of the time.

i didn't like the decision but am grateful for the the mods here - that aint no suck up, just a way to say thanks.


----------



## Thomas Barriano

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Peter,

If it talks like a suck up and walks like a suck up?
I'm voting you're a suck up ;-)


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

yeah Thomas i have so much to gain by sucking up to the mods.

OK to balance it out - the mods smell and they are ugly, figured all that out from their posts.


----------



## Bob Scott

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Woody was fairly new to dogs but he was waaay smarter then the average bear! Super quick wit!


----------



## Dave Colborn

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

There ought to be a poll to see who gets to be the next moderator. See what everyone would wish on themselves. Like democratic and only for humorous purposes...


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

i often wondered what things would look like if they dispensed with politicians deciding whats best for us and just had secure polls where evryone voted on things like going to war etc - it would be the purest form of democracy, it would be instant, easy to set up and a lot cheaper than running the current system/s.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

_"There ought to be a poll to see who gets to be the next moderator. See what everyone would wish on themselves. Like democratic and only for humorous purposes..."_


Well, if a new one is needed, and so far that is not the case, apps have been turned in. 

That is the way it would come to be. 

I am sure that Admin will still add new apps to the existing file.


----------



## Dave Colborn

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> Well, if a new one is needed, and so far that is not the case, apps have been turned in.
> 
> That is the way it would come to be.
> 
> I am sure that Admin will still add new apps to the existing file.



I understand you. Just thought it would be fun to see who would "win" that honor. I think you guys do a pretty good job for the most part, and it's likely no one would be perfect. Just think it would be fun to see who votes for who.

Love you connie, mean it!!!


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> i often wondered what things would look like if they dispensed with politicians deciding whats best for us and just had secure polls where evryone voted on things like going to war etc - it would be the purest form of democracy, it would be instant, easy to set up and a lot cheaper than running the current system/s.


Hmmm .... a true democracy rather than a republic (which of course is what we are) .... 

I believe there has never been a true democracy (except for those under the umbrella of another form of government). For example, in the U.S., town meetings (still actively functioning in many New England areas) operate, of course, under the republic which is the fundamental government here.

Think how unwieldy, deciding individually rather than electing "deciders" ... but interesting indeed! :-D


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

_"Love you connie, mean it!!"_


There you go .... inside track! :lol: :lol:


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

don't know enough about politics to know a republic from a democracy from a.... - just think technolgy would be easy for decision making or at least play a role in it - no qualifications, no nothing just the direct voice of the people - that care enough to poll. 

i thnik the original greeks did it with a raise of hands.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Well, if we define democracy as all of the residents having a vote, there has probably never been a true democracy, including Athens.

The way "citizens" were defined, lots of the residents were not entitled to vote.



ETA

Here's some stuff. Like so many things, terms have to be defined first. 

Of course, here on dog boards, we never have terminology confusion, so we will just have to try to imagine such a thing. 

http://ancienthistory.about.com/cs/greekfeatures/a/democracyriseof.htm
_"... the U.S. was not established as a pure democracy, but as a republic where voters elect representatives and electors. Whether there has ever been anything close to a pure and total democracy is debatable. There has never been universal suffrage -- and I'm not talking about voters disenfranchised by corruption or improper balloting and tallying. In ancient Athens, you had to be a citizen to vote. That left out more than half the population."_


and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_
" ... in a representative democracy, every vote has equal weight, no unreasonable restrictions can apply to anyone seeking to become a representative, and the freedom of its citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are generally protected by a constitution."_


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> Of course, here on dog boards, we never have terminology confusion, so we will just have to try to imagine such a thing.
> 
> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.......HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

did i also say HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

OK but still interesting to wonder what an actual real democracy would look like.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> OK but still interesting to wonder what an actual real democracy would look like.


I totally agree!

Would we email our votes?


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> I totally agree!
> 
> Would we email our votes?


 
thinking more on the lines of that stupid show "idol" (not sure how they actually vote on that though).

see the infra-structure is already there.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Connie, read a book written by an economist about the wild west (US), he found little evidence to support the "wild" view and found it quite a well organised, peaceful, safe, highly structured place/time way before it became "governmentised". the intuitive view that things would go to chaos without people making representative decisons for our own good doesn't seem to be supported by any historical evidence???


----------



## Thomas Jones

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> Connie, read a book written by an economist about the wild west (US), he found little evidence to support the "wild" view and found it quite a well organised, peaceful, safe, highly structured place/time way before it became "governmentised". the intuitive view that things would go to chaos without people making representative decisons for our own good doesn't seem to be supported by any historical evidence???


Watched a doc on it and its amazing how in the movies somebody is getting killed everyday but in reality the town the movie is based on only had 2 murders a year lol


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

haha hollywood wasn't built on stories of people quietly just gettin along with their lives


----------



## Selena van Leeuwen

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> Woody was a mod.
> 
> I miss him.
> 
> His work started taking too much time and he couldn't devote the time to WDF that he had been doing.
> 
> I know lots of us hoped for a long time that he would change his mind!


 Yep, still miss Woody.


----------



## David Frost

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> did i also say HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


and might I add, ha ha ha ha ha ha

DFrost


----------



## David Ruby

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Connie Sutherland said:


> Woody was a mod.
> 
> I miss him.
> 
> His work started taking too much time and he couldn't devote the time to WDF that he had been doing.
> 
> I know lots of us hoped for a long time that he would change his mind!


I'm glad it was something like that. I always worry when people just stop posting and you never hear why. I was sorry to see him stop posting.

I liked him and always hoped he'd start posting again, as a Mod or otherwise.

-Cheers


----------



## Jamie King

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Who were the guys? They sound like real pieces of work


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Jamie King said:


> Who were the guys?


You had to have been there.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



David Ruby said:


> I'm glad it was something like that. I always worry when people just stop posting and you never hear why. I was sorry to see him stop posting.
> 
> I liked him and always hoped he'd start posting again, as a Mod or otherwise.
> 
> -Cheers


Well, we never even un-modded him. Hope dies slow. :lol:

Who knows? Maybe he will swoop in some day!


----------



## Doug Zaga

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> no matter who was mod someone would have a problem with something sometime - thats life for anyone in any leadership type role.
> 
> on the WDF mods have to be more like parents than anything else - on average the mods work hard and get it right for the most, most of the time.
> 
> i didn't like the decision but am grateful for the the mods here - that aint no suck up, just a way to say thanks.


Suck Pump!!!


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Doug Zaga said:


> Suck Pump!!!



Hey! Don't interrupt the boy when he has important stuff to say! 

:lol:


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

how long will i be made to regret that post .

didn't ya see the bit where i said they smell and are ugly


----------



## Bob Scott

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Peter Cavallaro said:


> how long will i be made to regret that post .
> 
> didn't ya see the bit where i said they smell and are ugly


Hey, I take at the least, one shower a day. Don't have much of an argument on the ugly though. :lol:


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Bob Scott said:


> Hey, I take at the least, one shower a day. Don't have much of an argument on the ugly though. :lol:


 


but we are all beautiful on the inside man






can i puke icon my own post


----------



## Bob Scott

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

:lol::lol::lol: Just don't go all kumbiyaa on us! :lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

i luv u man, i luv all of ya's



OK enough, enough


----------



## Guest

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

maybe its time these two are allowed back, on probabation? Seems most people have left, gone, lurking, hiding etc. But in all honestly miss the training, tactical, situational, detailed discussions that use to be here, now its a whole lot different and many may like, not saying anything derrogatory, but with emails and pms I get, it seems like more than you think would like these two back....

just a thought...


----------



## Erin Suggett

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Thomas Barriano said:


> This is the WORKING Dog Forum. I'd like to see less pet dog questions.


Thomas, there _are_ some working dogs out there that are also considered pets.


----------



## maggie fraser

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Jody Butler said:


> maybe its time these two are allowed back, on probabation? Seems most people have left, gone, lurking, hiding etc. But in all honestly miss the training, tactical, situational, detailed discussions that use to be here, now its a whole lot different and many may like, not saying anything derrogatory, but with emails and pms I get, it seems like more than you think would like these two back....
> 
> just a thought...


Nice thought !


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Jody Butler said:


> maybe its time these two are allowed back, on probabation?


I think the admins already tried repeated warnings and probation and it was made very clear to them that the people in question had no intentions of following the rules. They knew they would get banned if they didn't stop, they still didn't stop. Why would the admins want to bring that administrative headache back?


----------



## David Frost

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Kadi Thingvall said:


> I think the admins already tried repeated warnings and probation and it was made very clear to them that the people in question had no intentions of following the rules. They knew they would get banned if they didn't stop, they still didn't stop. Why would the admins want to bring that administrative headache back?


I can't think of a reason.


On a separate matter: If someone feels there is a non-working dog question, point it out to a moderator. Just keep in mind that just because a post doesn't fit a persons description of working dog, doesn't meant that it isn't a working dog. (or something like that) We've (the mods) have said many times, we don't read all the forums. If there is a problem in a thread and no one tells us, we won't know until the bottom has fallen out, then it's generally too late to salvage anyway. 

DFrost


----------



## Jim Engel

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



leslie cassian said:


> I know, Jeff was the author of his own misfortune, and I wish he could have reined himself in a bit.


Problem with this is that if your reign in the nonsense there is nothing left.


----------



## Harry Keely

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

I never had no beef with either one if memory serves me right, never really talk to Gerry to much or any and vice versa, But Jeff I talked to a little bit hear and there and never felt like I was getting rail roaded by the guy, yea he was a little crazy at times but who hasn't been on here that truly cares about these types of dogs. I know I am guilty of being a ass on more than one occasion, 99% of the time its not personal its just more the topic gets me hot. I think that was the case with both these gentleman.

Anyways we are human and all bleed the same color, I say give it another whirl or two, last time I checked I have yet to meet a sin free soul. We are taught to forgive and forget and make nice:lol:O, or maybe just IGNORE:-$ in best case scenarios, anyways I vote to bring them back and try again.


----------



## maggie fraser

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Harry Keely said:


> I never had no beef with either one if memory serves me right, never really talk to Gerry to much or any and vice versa, But Jeff I talked to a little bit hear and there and never felt like I was getting rail roaded by the guy, yea he was a little crazy at times but who hasn't been on here that truly cares about these types of dogs. I know I am guilty of being a ass on more than one occasion, 99% of the time its not personal its just more the topic gets me hot. I think that was the case with both these gentleman.
> 
> Anyways we are human and all bleed the same color, I say give it another whirl or two, last time I checked I have yet to meet a sin free soul. We are taught to forgive and forget and make nice:lol:O, or maybe just IGNORE:-$ in best case scenarios, anyways I vote to bring them back and try again.


Harry, you sounded almost human ! Good on ya .


----------



## maggie fraser

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Jim Engel said:


> Problem with this is that if your reign in the nonsense there is nothing left.


Says who ? You ?

Whippin boy !!!


----------



## chris race

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Jody Butler said:


> Thats not for me to answer, but cmon, half the people on here have BS profiles and talk the almighty talk, probably never did shit. But its the internet we can all be professionals


 Well put! Agreed.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Did gerry ever talk dogs???

I must have missed it.


----------



## Harry Keely

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



maggie fraser said:


> Harry, you sounded almost human ! Good on ya .


Yea well I guess having a daughter 6 months ago, and being on meds for 45 days and locked up like a caged animal has got me slowing down a little bit:lol::lol::lol:, my wife told me a great thing not long ago and thats let people make there own beds and dig there own graves and worry about where you rest yours and you will have alot less stress. Its true I try not to get to much on my plate at one time and enjoy more time with the kids and dog(s) and I actually do feel better, it might be just a mental thing but it works HAHAHA. I am looking for easy street or going to try to stay on easy streets the rest of my days because being stressed, run down and sick and shit SUCKS BIG TIME. Oh yea nd not going on public dog forums to much anymore helps to


----------



## Nicole Stark

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

Not that it matters to the moderators but I don't find the content as interesting as I once did. This is because I found the subject matter and conversations to be more thought provoking when Jeff was here. Why? Because Jeff had a way of challenging people and the people who stepped up to meet that challenge were often individuals who had a skillset and experience level that suitably matched the discussion at hand.

After Jeff left it appears that the the culture of this forum changed. It disappoints me because at one time I could count on officers, members of the armed forces, high level competitors and aggressive students of a chosen sport or training venue to provide high level and intelligent dialogue. Today, the capacity of the membership to remain engaged or sustain a legitimate discussion on training styles/techniques, etc no longer exists in the way it once did.

In the name of the WDF what did the membership gain by that decision? My intent in presenting the question is not to challenge the forum rules. What I am asking is how consistent was that action with the original objective and intended audience of this forum? Members like myself who are strictly limited in resources due to location, or others because of their area of specialization, etc don't appear to be able to count upon this forum to be the resource it once was.


----------



## Brian Anderson

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Nicole Stark said:


> Not that it matters to the moderators but I don't find the content as interesting as I once did. This is because I found the subject matter and conversations to be more thought provoking when Jeff was here. Why? Because Jeff had a way of challenging people and the people who stepped up to meet that challenge were often individuals who had a skillset and experience level that suitably matched the discussion at hand.
> 
> After Jeff left it appears that the the culture of this forum changed. It disappoints me because at one time I could count on officers, members of the armed forces, high level competitors and aggressive students of a chosen sport or training venue to provide high level and intelligent dialogue. Today, the capacity of the membership to remain engaged or sustain a legitimate discussion on training styles/techniques, etc no longer exists in the way it once did.
> 
> In the name of the WDF what did the membership gain by that decision? My intent in presenting the question is not to challenge the forum rules. What I am asking is how consistent was that action with the original objective and intended audience of this forum? Members like myself who are strictly limited in resources due to location, or others because of their area of specialization, etc don't appear to be able to count upon this forum to be the resource it once was.


I wouldn't disagree with you. I visited with Jeff and found him to be a very nice guy in that context. I had talked with him about working dogs because we (the company I work for) are working down in the area where he lives. As it turned out I have not had the opportunity yet to do so. Sometimes these posts are misinterpreted because of no voice inflection or context. Not to say that folks don't make bone headed statements. Jeff body checked me a couple times and I checked him back. Then we got along fine. And we all know there is no interest in the world that produces more opinionated people than dog training. People who are outspoken can piss folks off .... but they can also bring things to the surface that a lot of people would rather leave as a pink elephant in the room and, in that, an improvement can happen. 

All these people who wear their feelings around on their shoulder like a parrot aren't going to be very successful training highly driven dogs. I often wonder how they make it in the real world if they feel pressured by what someone says on an internet forum. But hey!! thats me


----------



## David Frost

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*

If someone was so great and willing to help, would it not stand to reason that there's some other fabulous web board now where that/those person/persons are reigning supreme. I wonder where that is. Why aren't more people talking about and recruiting others for that wonderful, thought-provoking and challenging board right now. 

Just me being curious.

DFrost


----------



## Brian Anderson

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



David Frost said:


> If someone was so great and willing to help, would it not stand to reason that there's some other fabulous web board now where that/those person/persons are reigning supreme. I wonder where that is. Why aren't more people talking about and recruiting other for that wonderful, thought-provoking and challenging board right now.
> 
> Just me being curious.
> 
> DFrost


and to think I thought I was the only one lol


----------



## Sara Waters

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Erin Suggett said:


> Thomas, there _are_ some working dogs out there that are also considered pets.


Yes, I consider mine pets. The definition of working dog is also interesting. I have a couple of bona fide working dogs - I could not run my livestock enterprise without them. The others I do agility and obedience with. I call this sport rather than working. Lots of training involved and we like to do well but at the end of the day it is sport and lots of fun. I didnt mind either Jeff or Gerry, had some interesting threads with Jeff and his challenging ways.


----------



## susan tuck

Brian Anderson said:


> All these people who wear their feelings around on their shoulder like a parrot aren't going to be very successful training highly driven dogs. I often wonder how they make it in the real world if they feel pressured by what someone says on an internet forum. But hey!! thats me


Who are "all these people" you are talking about? Why do you assume this is why Jeff got the boot? Did the mods ever say Jeff was 86'ed because sensitive people complained about him? No, I don't think that was it at all. If that were the case he would have been tossed out on his ear a long time ago. I'm guessing it probably had more to do with mods being sick and tired of babysitting someone who couldn't be bothered with following the rules. People who can't filter their own mouths are tiresome. Anyway, if you want to find him it's easy enough, just google his name.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

*re: Jeff O & Gerry G & other stuff*



Sara Waters said:


> Yes, I consider mine pets. The definition of working dog is also interesting. I have a couple of bona fide working dogs - I could not run my livestock enterprise without them. The others I do agility and obedience with. I call this sport rather than working. Lots of training involved and we like to do well but at the end of the day it is sport and lots of fun. I didnt mind either Jeff or Gerry, had some interesting threads with Jeff and his challenging ways.


_
"The definition of working dog is also interesting."_


It is interesting. I hardly ever read two people's definitions that are precisely the same.


----------



## Nicole Stark

*Re: Jeff O & Gerry G*



David Frost said:


> If someone was so great and willing to help, would it not stand to reason that there's some other fabulous web board now where that/those person/persons are reigning supreme. I wonder where that is. Why aren't more people talking about and recruiting others for that wonderful, thought-provoking and challenging board right now.
> 
> Just me being curious.
> 
> DFrost


Since you asked David, I have. The reality is that for an environment like that to thrive you need diversity. This board obviously represents that. I'd simply like to see it more balanced. An example of that would be that I would genuinely welcome seeing more detection based discussions and video's covering that type of work posted here. As much as the topic interests me, given my lack of experience and exposure to this type of work I am relatively incapable of starting or participating in an intelligent discussion on the topic. 

I put together several dozen videos of the work I've done with my young DS along the way. I have shared some of them with a few people I felt would be willing and capable of providing feedback and insight into additional activities I could incorporate to help develop her in this capacity. And for that, I am very thankful that the WDF exists as it offered me visibility and access to people I would have never otherwise had the pleasure of getting to know.


----------



## David Frost

*Re: Jeff O & Gerry G*

"I would genuinely welcome seeing more detection based discussions"

I don't mind discussion detection. I stay out of sport discussion because I'm ignorant of sport. I do know detection, at least on a police level. There are very few things I don't mind talking about on an open forum about detection. There are a few things I don't feel comfortable discussing, but that's just me. There really aren't that many "secrets" in detection training. More so in the tactical or operational deployment, but that is the nature of the beast. As for diversity, I don't believe anyone has ever been booted from this forum for disagreeing or stating another view point. I agree diversity keeps it interesting. Bullying, destroying threads, personal attacks etc, however are not diversity, but destructive. That is what gets people booted, not disagreement with anothers thought. 

You say: "given my lack of experience and exposure to this type of work I am relatively incapable of starting or participating in an intelligent discussion on the topic."

In some instances others feel the same way and won't even try because of attacks on them personally. Fits in with the thread of 'Where did they go". You are an established member, what stops you. Are you that bashful or is there a fear of someone trashing your question. Personally, I don't think you have that problem. I know others do. The worst that should happen to an honest question is for it to go unanswered. The second worst thing, in my mind is; a person is told it's not an appropriate question. To be told to Eff off, is unacceptable, to be told you are worthless is unacceptable. True some are a little too sensitive, but still the computer ninja, while not only cowardly, is tiring. 

DFrost


----------



## Nicole Stark

*Re: Jeff O & Gerry G*



David Frost said:


> You are an established member, what stops you.
> 
> DFrost


The answer to that is simple. I'll use the following analogy to explain it.

Concerning drive building exercises and developing young detection dogs, I see myself in a bit of a foreign country, one that I have always wanted to visit or even live in for that matter. But in this "country" I find that I don't know the language, nor the customs of the people, and therefore my best vantage point for learning either is through observation.


----------



## Brian Anderson

susan tuck said:


> Who are "all these people" you are talking about? Why do you assume this is why Jeff got the boot? Did the mods ever say Jeff was 86'ed because sensitive people complained about him? No, I don't think that was it at all. If that were the case he would have been tossed out on his ear a long time ago. I'm guessing it probably had more to do with mods being sick and tired of babysitting someone who couldn't be bothered with following the rules. People who can't filter their own mouths are tiresome. Anyway, if you want to find him it's easy enough, just google his name.


susan if you read the posts you will see a lot of responses from people who are fearful of posting because of what might be said. Has nothing to do with Jeff. The OP is Jeff O and Gerry so I commented on Jeff O. I have no idea why he got suspended. I dont really give a damn he is grown. I dont have to google him I have his phone number. My point was to say that when I spoke to him he didnt seem nearly as brash and outspoken as what he came off as on the forum. I try not to make assumptions 8)


----------



## Harry Keely

Brian Anderson said:


> susan if you read the posts you will see a lot of responses from people who are fearful of posting because of what might be said. Has nothing to do with Jeff. The OP is Jeff O and Gerry so I commented on Jeff O. I have no idea why he got suspended. I dont really give a damn he is grown. I dont have to google him I have his phone number. My point was to say that when I spoke to him he didnt seem nearly as brash and outspoken as what he came off as on the forum. I try not to make assumptions 8)


Well said Brian, you cant only paint a picture in your mind of somebody through a computer screen, but I wouldnt right his biography on it until I actually met the person face to face and trained with him or at the least talk over the phone. 

Forums are good for one thing and one thing only and thats to spread ones propaganda or stir the pot in which we are all guilty of to see how a person responds. By no means should you base a book on its cover and thats all you get here. I've have had the pleasure of meeting a few or so more from this forum and the PSA forum, and was kinda riding the fence but when mmeting them and some of their dogs I was like hell there pretty cool.

As far as Jeff gos I dont have one bit of problem with him and have talked with him on Facebook and on private messaging and have had normal adult conversations with the man FYI.


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

So when do we get to the ' other stuff' as per the thread title???


----------



## Doug Zaga

Peter Cavallaro said:


> So when do we get to the ' other stuff' as per the thread title???


 
We just did...you posted Pete \\/


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Right now:




Nicole Stark said:


> The answer to that is simple. I'll use the following analogy to explain it.
> 
> Concerning drive building exercises and developing young detection dogs, I see myself in a bit of a foreign country, one that I have always wanted to visit or even live in for that matter. But in this "country" I find that I don't know the language, nor the customs of the people, and therefore my best vantage point for learning either is through observation.


You are articulate and you know dogs and training.

To hold back from asking questions and starting discussions on drive building exercises and developing young detection dogs seems way reticent. It's a dog board! 



eta 
I mean, look at Post #104. And you hold yourself back?! :lol:


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Cheers, just though it was getting repetitive, u know, thread was starting to spin the wheels but not move forward.

glad to help, what's the scope on the other stuff, don't wanna derail.


----------



## Doug Zaga

connie sutherland said:


> right now:
> 
> 
> 
> Eta
> i mean, look at post #104. And you hold yourself back?! :lol:


xoxoxoxox


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

We're not all mals, some of us don't dig the high rep stuff.


----------



## Nicole Stark

Connie Sutherland said:


> Right now:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are articulate and you know dogs and training.
> 
> To hold back from asking questions and starting discussions on drive building exercises and developing young detection dogs seems way reticent. It's a dog board!
> 
> 
> 
> eta
> I mean, look at Post #104. And you hold yourself back?! :lol:


There's not much likelihood that I could have made the progress I have with her without asking questions, that much is a given. I'm efficient minded and figured going straight to the source would yield far better results. 

I'm not exactly sure how you got that out of what I said anyway. I merely meant I enjoy watching dogs work in that capacity and listening to the stories people tell about problems they set up, interesting finds that were made, etc. I'd almost need to have a multiple personality to think it a good idea to put up something of my own that I've done with my dog. People who were interested in seeing our progress have either asked for video or subscribed to my YouTube page.


----------



## Laney Rein

Nicole, I am fairly new to detection work and read everything I can and watch you tube videos. I am also finally driving 2 hours 1 way weekly to train with a professional. I find that we have our biggest source of information right here, tho. David is like a detection guru/expert. I respect the heck out of him and he always answers my silly questions with sincerity. Take advantage of the offer to help. I'm interested in what you're doing as I'm sure others are.

Thanks David!


----------



## David Frost

There are two things that prevent me from post training videos; 1. I don't have a recording device. Folks may think it untrue, but consider, I don't own a cell phone. I carry a phone, yes, but it's state issued. My home phone (a requirement for where I work) goes unanswered (the ringer is turned off). 2. An a very important consideration; I'm not permitted to post videos of official business without approval. It's a PITA to get approval so I just don't bother trying. The same regulation that limits that also specifically states any emblem, vehicle or equipment can not be posted on social media ie Facebook etc (which I do not have an account). I have videoed training to show handlers what they were doing. I find video an excellant means of training, particularly in showing a handler what they are missing and helping them "read" a dog. I don't believe in video for "certification" because our certification system is designed around a fully documented view of the whole dog. A video is only a snapshot of one performance. 

DFrost


----------



## Guest

David Frost said:


> There are two things that prevent me from post training videos; 1. I don't have a recording device. Folks may think it untrue, but consider, I don't own a cell phone. I carry a phone, yes, but it's state issued. My home phone (a requirement for where I work) goes unanswered (the ringer is turned off). 2. An a very important consideration; I'm not permitted to post videos of official business without approval. It's a PITA to get approval so I just don't bother trying. The same regulation that limits that also specifically states any emblem, vehicle or equipment can not be posted on social media ie Facebook etc (which I do not have an account). I have videoed training to show handlers what they were doing. I find video an excellant means of training, particularly in showing a handler what they are missing and helping them "read" a dog. I don't believe in video for "certification" because our certification system is designed around a fully documented view of the whole dog. A video is only a snapshot of one performance.
> 
> DFrost


hmm, I can understand that


----------



## David Frost

I should have included, people are permitted to attend and observe training. We are a state agency and what I do, for the most part, is public record. There are a few places we train people would not be permitted, but nothing in the training is so secret people can not attend. I have people on occasion, attend routine training days and see exactly what we do. The only restriction is, they are not permitted to participate, unless they are sworn law enforcement. There are even a couple of vendor that have criticized me because I offer training, on a space available basis to other departments, free. There is never a charge. My last drug class had a deputy from a TN county. He even stayed at the training center free. His department did have to pay his meals, transportation etc and of course he had to supply his own dog. A dog that I had to approve before he could start training. He is even issued a training aid kit, if his department requires him to follow our inventory procedure. If the handler maintains our documentation system, he can also participate in our annual certification. It's all free. I may be an egotistical SOB (which I freely admit) when it comes to dog training but I still have department rules to follow.

DFrost


----------



## Chris McDonald

David Frost said:


> It's all free.
> 
> ??????????


----------



## David Frost

Chris McDonald said:


> David Frost said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's all free.
> 
> ??????????
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Free as in they don't have to pay for training. If I have a class in session, they can attend on a space-available basis. They can attend my in-service training free, which many do. There is almost always room for one more at in-service training. Annual certification with the department, while a bit more complicated, is also without cost to them.
> 
> DFrost
Click to expand...


----------



## Chris McDonald

David Frost said:


> Chris McDonald said:
> 
> 
> 
> Free as in they don't have to pay for training. If I have a class in session, they can attend on a space-available basis. They can attend my in-service training free, which many do. There is almost always room for one more at in-service training. Annual certification with the department, while a bit more complicated, is also without cost to them.
> 
> DFrost
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, thanks, I never heard of a LE in one town paying an LE of another town for training? Did not know that could happen but I don’t know much. In NJ it always seems like there are a bunch of different towns and even agencies all at the same cert class.
> You do know nothing is really for free, Right? :razz:
Click to expand...


----------



## David Frost

Chris McDonald said:


> David Frost said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You do know nothing is really for free, Right? :razz:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes sir, I know that. I work cheap, but not free. ha ha
> 
> DFrost
Click to expand...


----------



## ann schnerre

cheap, but not easy. hahaha


----------



## hillel schwartzman

Jody Butler said:


> Thats not for me to answer, but cmon, half the people on here have BS profiles and talk the almighty talk, probably never did shit. But its the internet we can all be professionals


BEST line ever Jody .........

I miss Jeff O...Someone has to back their crap up by stepping on the field,,,At least Jeff O did...

Jody you win the best line of the month award.......


----------



## susan tuck

hillel schwartzman said:


> BEST line ever Jody .........
> 
> I miss Jeff O...Someone has to back their crap up by stepping on the field,,,At least Jeff O did...
> 
> Jody you win the best line of the month award.......


You know what Hillel? That crack about half the people having BS profiles, that's actually Jeffs. In fact to this day, he continues to throw it out there when he's in a particularly belligerent mood and wants to stir the shit. Personally, if I thought half the regular members were simply bullshitting I wouldn't bother with posting and I think others feel the same way. For the life of me, I can't figure out why anyone who really feels that way would post either, because what exactly would be the point? Why would you waste time with a bunch of fakers? For myself, when I think someone's faking it I specifically call that person on their shit, rather than make some cheap passive aggressive remark tossed out in the general direction of the entire forum membership.


----------



## Guest

susan tuck said:


> You know what Hillel? That crack about half the people having BS profiles, that's actually Jeffs. In fact to this day, he continues to throw it out there when he's in a particularly belligerent mood and wants to stir the shit. Personally, if I thought half the regular members were simply bullshitting I wouldn't bother with posting and I think others feel the same way. For the life of me, I can't figure out why anyone who really feels that way would post either, because what exactly would be the point? Why would you waste time with a bunch of fakers? For myself, when I think someone's faking it I specifically call that person on their shit, rather than make some cheap passive aggressive remark tossed out in the general direction of the entire forum membership.


 
Wow, do I sense sensitivity? geez, well coming from you, it doesn't make a difference, you seem to always get emotional very easily, no biggie! Cheap Passive remark in general of dog forum...hmmm well how many members do you know for real? Met in person? You beleive everything you read or someone types? Only if it agrees and goes along with your lifestyle or training im sure, thats how people are. This isnt about Jeff O, but most overlook that to begin with. Stirring the pot sometimes is the only way to get conversation out of most, and others run and hide, while most smiply get emotional becuase it goes against all they have done or beleive in. Obvioulsy, we know where most stand, but thats neither here nor there. I have very tough skin, there isn't anything you or anyone can say or do to get at me, so its pointless unless you see some gratification. I am far too grown for games.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

I know several "for real."

I know even more who know others.


I'm just guessing, but I suspect that people naming a sport or other organized venue would have a hard time BSing all the way.

On top of that, there are pretty pointed questions about clubs, etc., in the Bio threads.

Personally, I have extreme doubt that 50% of the people who post regularly here are fakes.


----------



## Gillian Schuler

What's emotional about Susan Tuck's post?

Hillel's remark about 50% of the forum having BS profiles - maybe it takes one to know one!!


----------



## Guest

Connie Sutherland said:


> I know several "for real."
> 
> I know even more who know others.
> 
> 
> I'm just guessing, but I suspect that people naming a sport or other organized venue would have a hard time BSing all the way.
> 
> On top of that, there are pretty pointed questions about clubs, etc., in the Bio threads.
> 
> Personally, I have extreme doubt that 50% of the people who post regularly here are fakes.


I don't mean fakes as don't exist or not involved. I mean they exagerate a whole hell of alot more than they are in everything they do. 50% wasn't a number nor meant to be, it was a figure of speech, however how many total members and how many in person, not what others say? 

You have got to be a smart lady and not take what someone else says as the 100% truth now. LOL

And I have met quite a few on here as well and more who know each other as well......


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Jody Butler said:


> .... And I have met quite a few on here as well and more who know each other as well. .....



Makes major exaggeration kinda tough. 




PS
I didn't get "emotional" from Sue's post, either.


----------



## susan tuck

Jody Butler said:


> Wow, do I sense sensitivity? geez, well coming from you, it doesn't make a difference, you seem to always get emotional very easily, no biggie! Cheap Passive remark in general of dog forum...hmmm well how many members do you know for real? Met in person? You beleive everything you read or someone types? Only if it agrees and goes along with your lifestyle or training im sure, thats how people are. This isnt about Jeff O, but most overlook that to begin with. Stirring the pot sometimes is the only way to get conversation out of most, and others run and hide, while most smiply get emotional becuase it goes against all they have done or beleive in. Obvioulsy, we know where most stand, but thats neither here nor there. I have very tough skin, there isn't anything you or anyone can say or do to get at me, so its pointless unless you see some gratification. I am far too grown for games.


Emotional over something you say that's not even directed at me? Come on, that's just silly. I have always felt casting nets over forums with stupid remarks like "almost everyone is a fake" is exactly what someone does when they get emotional and pissy. If you think someone's a fake, then call them a fake, but to accuse half the board of being fake when you don't know the people you are talking about is just weak.


----------



## Guest

Connie Sutherland said:


> Makes major exaggeration kinda tough.


 
LOL, no no very easy. What they may type and say one thing, in person.......somehow different? :-k


----------



## Guest

susan tuck said:


> Emotional over something you or Jeff say? That's pretty funny. I have always felt casting nets over forums with stupid remarks like "almost everyone is a fake" is exactly what someone does when they get emotional and pissy. If you think someone's a fake, then call them a fake, but to accuse half the board of being fake when you don't know the people you are talking about is just weak.


 
k


----------



## Kadi Thingvall

Jody Butler;306647What they may type and say one thing said:


> Hmmm, sounds familiar. How many times have we read comments on this forum from people who have "seen" a person on the forum repeatedly act like a attack others, be belligerent, and basically just be a jerk, but when they met that person in real life they were so nice, and helpful, and even polite?


----------



## susan tuck

Kadi Thingvall said:


> Hmmm, sounds familiar. How many times have we read comments on this forum from people who have "seen" a person on the forum repeatedly act like a attack others, be belligerent, and basically just be a jerk, but when they met that person in real life they were so nice, and helpful, and even polite?


hahaha yep. Exactly! Like the little dog behind the big fence.
:lol:


----------



## Guest

Kadi Thingvall said:


> Hmmm, sounds familiar. How many times have we read comments on this forum from people who have "seen" a person on the forum repeatedly act like a attack others, be belligerent, and basically just be a jerk, but when they met that person in real life they were so nice, and helpful, and even polite?


----------



## susan tuck

Jody Butler said:


> I don't mean fakes as don't exist or not involved. I mean they exagerate a whole hell of alot more than they are in everything they do. 50% wasn't a number nor meant to be, it was a figure of speech, however how many total members and how many in person, not what others say?
> 
> You have got to be a smart lady and not take what someone else says as the 100% truth now. LOL
> 
> And I have met quite a few on here as well and more who know each other as well......


I take people at their word until they prove otherwise, but by the same token, when it comes to advise, I take people I don't know with a big ole grain of salt. I agree though, there are those who exagerate their experience, probably to lend credence to what comes out of their mouths when they are putting others down, like when pressed for specifics about their experience titling dogs coming up with being responsible for training top 5 schutzhund dogs (of course, never any specific names). Whatever that is since there is not and never was a rating system to determine "top 5 dogs".

I don't think someone has to necessarily have a lot of names and titles to back up what they say, but I do think it's really funny and more than a little ironic when they scoff at others for that same reason.


----------



## Guest

susan tuck said:


> I take people at their word until they prove otherwise, but by the same token, when it comes to advise, I take people I don't know with a big ole grain of salt. I agree though, there are those who exagerate their experience, probably to lend credence to what comes out of their mouths when they are putting others down, like when pressed for specifics about their experience titling dogs coming up with being responsible for training top 5 schutzhund dogs (of course, never any specific names). Whatever that is since there is not and never was a rating system to determine "top 5 dogs".
> 
> I don't think someone has to necessarily have a lot of names and titles to back up what they say, but I do think it's really funny and more than a little ironic when they scoff at others for that same reason.


 
Can't say that I disagree with you there. :twisted:

I am a little different, It may seem like I take people by word of mouth, but like anything else, its more about show me. But, only if it is something I am interested in, if it isn't I leave it alone. People who know you will trust/beleive you, others will talk shit, ignore or doubt you, its really about who you surround yourself with.


But for real, why is there more post/views/comments on threads that have nothing to do with dog training? Thats what I have been trying to figure out before I punch out of here?


----------



## Brian Anderson

susan tuck said:


> I take people at their word until they prove otherwise, but by the same token, I take people I don't know with a big ole grain of salt. I agree though, there are those who exagerate their experience, maybe to give credence to what comes out of their mouths sometimes, like when pressed for specifics about their experience titling dogs coming up with being responsible for training top 5 schutzhund dogs. Whatever that is since there is not and never was a rating system to determine "top 5 dogs".


Susan thats nothing I have a 8 month old we are going for top 22 schutzhund dogs (he passed his 21 in a breeze because he is imported). We do that when we aren't preparing executive protection dogs for celebrity atheletes. :-D Of course all of our dogs are imported from various euro countries. Id tell you where but we are sworn to keep it a secret. We have exclusive contracts with 2 FR 13 decoys we occasionally allow to work lessor dogs if we feel they are worthy.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Brian Anderson said:


> Susan thats nothing I have a 8 month old we are going for top 22 schutzhund dogs (he passed his 21 in a breeze because he is imported). We do that when we aren't preparing executive protection dogs for celebrity atheletes. :-D Of course all of our dogs are imported from various euro countries. Id tell you where but we are sworn to keep it a secret. We have exclusive contracts with 2 FR 13 decoys we occasionally allow to work lessor dogs if we feel they are worthy.



I totally believe every word.


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Jody Butler said:


> .... But for real, why is there more post/views/comments on threads that have nothing to do with dog training? Thats what I have been trying to figure out before I punch out of here?


Good point. JMHO!


----------



## susan tuck

Jody Butler said:


> Can't say that I disagree with you there. :twisted:
> 
> I am a little different, It may seem like I take people by word of mouth, but like anything else, its more about show me. But, only if it is something I am interested in, if it isn't I leave it alone. People who know you will trust/beleive you, others will talk shit, ignore or doubt you, its really about who you surround yourself with.
> 
> 
> But for real, why is there more post/views/comments on threads that have nothing to do with dog training? Thats what I have been trying to figure out before I punch out of here?


I know for me, I do my training on the field, I don't look to the Internet for training advise, but that's just me. I come to this board because I like the people - at least as far as I can tell!!!! We have a common bond. Still though, it's social for me, I don't come here to solve specific training problems, but some topics do make me think and sometimes we all get a good laugh at something or other. I mean come on, how many threads and pages of threads on tables yea or nay and whether or not dogs have fight drive can you stand?
:razz:


----------



## David Frost

susan tuck;306676 whether or not dogs have fight drive can you stand?
:razz:[/QUOTE said:


> They do ya know.
> 
> DFrost


----------



## Guest

susan tuck said:


> I know for me, I do my training on the field, I don't look to the Internet for training advise, but that's just me. I come to this board because I like the people - at least as far as I can tell!!!! We have a common bond. Still though, it's social for me, I don't come here to solve specific training problems, but some topics do make me think and sometimes we all get a good laugh at something or other. I mean come on, how many threads and pages of threads on tables yea or nay and whether or not dogs have fight drive can you stand?
> :razz:


 
so what are your thoughts on tables?


----------



## Connie Sutherland

David Frost said:


> They do ya know.
> 
> DFrost


Do not.



:lol:


----------



## David Frost

Connie Sutherland said:


> Do not.
> 
> 
> 
> :lol:


chuckle, chuckle.

DFrost


----------



## Connie Sutherland

susan tuck said:


> .... I come to this board because I like the people ..... We have a common bond. .... I don't come here to solve specific training problems, but some topics do make me think and sometimes we all get a good laugh at something or other.


Good points! And it IS a good place to ask training questions, IMO.

I also appreciate training clips, all levels of training and any venue.


----------



## hillel schwartzman

Connie Sutherland said:


> Good points! And it IS a good place to ask training questions, IMO.
> 
> I also appreciate training clips, all levels of training and any venue.


 Me too!!! I just miss some of Jeff's comedy !!


----------



## susan tuck

Brian Anderson said:


> Susan thats nothing I have a 8 month old we are going for top 22 schutzhund dogs (he passed his 21 in a breeze because he is imported). We do that when we aren't preparing executive protection dogs for celebrity atheletes. :-D Of course all of our dogs are imported from various euro countries. Id tell you where but we are sworn to keep it a secret. We have exclusive contracts with 2 FR 13 decoys we occasionally allow to work lessor dogs if we feel they are worthy.


What???? Already 8 months old and not yet top 10 in the country? What's wrong with him? Hopeless case, too slow to mature, should prolly wash him out of your program. Next thing you know you'll be telling me he gets tired after only 5 or 6 hours when chasing a rag, or worse yet, you have to actually show him a toy for him to display high drive, he doesn't just naturally bounce around off his kennel walls like a pin ball 24/7, that means you are artificially building drive, waste of time. What a shitter.


----------



## Brian Anderson

susan tuck said:


> what???? Already 8 months old and not yet top 10 in the country? What's wrong with him? Hopeless case, too slow to mature, should prolly wash him out of your program. Next thing you know you'll be telling me he gets tired after only 5 or 6 hours when chasing a rag, or worse yet, you have to actually show him a toy for him to display high drive, he doesn't just naturally bounce around off his kennel walls like a pin ball 24/7, that means you are artificially building drive, waste of time. What a shitter.


lmao \\:d/


----------



## Kelly Godwin

Jody Butler said:


> Anyone hear from these two as of late? Hope they are doing well.


I really miss Jeff being here. He gave some people a lot of heck, some deserved, but he also provided a lot of good tips and insight. He really knows his stuff and is more than willing to help those who ask.

He's still the same Jeff on Facebook. Quick wit and no BS LOL


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Kelly Godwin said:


> .... gave some people a lot of heck ....



:lol: :lol: :lol:


Hey! Watch your language!


----------



## Kelly Godwin

Connie Sutherland said:


> :lol: :lol: :lol:
> 
> 
> Hey! Watch your language!


Noted. LOL


----------



## Thomas Barriano

Kelly Godwin said:


> I really miss Jeff being here. He gave some people a lot of heck, some deserved, but he also provided a lot of good tips and insight. He really knows his stuff and is more than willing to help those who ask.
> 
> He's still the same Jeff on Facebook. Quick wit and no BS LOL


Kelly

It's really funny that everybody thinks that Jeff Oehlsen was the expert at calling BS. Having spent a lot of time at the same training club . I can assure you that Jeff is as full of shite
as anyone else ;-)


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

So the other stuff we were getting to?


----------



## David Frost

Peter Cavallaro said:


> So the other stuff we were getting to?


You must be reading only the ones that interest you. There have been at least 5 topic discussed as "other stuff". I won't do your research for you because I don't know how to copy from other posts and post in this post (huh). Anyway, read the thread and you'll find, "other stuff". 

DFrost


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

good investigative skills, 

at least no-one can get off topic when the thread involves discussing ' stuff'.

makes policing the threads a no brainer.


----------



## David Frost

Peter Cavallaro said:


> makes policing the threads a no brainer.


Fits me to a tee.

DFrost


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

lol all threads from now on must end in 'and stuff' to ensure its not possible to get off topic.

has its merits.


----------



## Nicole Stark

Peter Cavallaro said:


> lol all threads from now on must end in 'and stuff' to ensure its not possible to get off topic.
> 
> has its merits.


Sure. Me thinks it would have developed into a more interesting thread if he ended it with "& other junk". I mean just think of the possibilities with that. Maybe we can get a moderator to change the title [-o<


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Nicole Stark said:


> Maybe we can get a moderator to change the title [-o<



To "excluding Peter" ?

:lol:



eta: How about "and other stuff with merit" ? :lol:


----------



## Peter Cavallaro

Mods, check Nicole, shes gettin off topic, trying to derail the thread about stuff.


----------



## Nicole Stark

Peter Cavallaro said:


> Mods, check Nicole, shes gettin off topic, trying to derail the thread about stuff.


Yes and quite intentionally at that. Move on Peter, I've got my mind on junk right now. You are welcome to join in the conversation if you would like. \\/


----------



## Connie Sutherland

Nicole Stark said:


> Yes and quite intentionally at that. Move on Peter, I've got my mind on junk right now. You are welcome to join in the conversation if you would like. \\/


Pay attention, Peter. We have moved from stuff to junk.


----------



## Harry Keely

Thanks forum for filling my boredom issues this weekend, see ya next time\\/


----------

