[O] The Cat Crept In...
Nigel Stapley
Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
cats from crapping in one's garden?
(My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
object to.
TIA
--
Regards
Nigel Stapley
<reply-to will bounce>
Elliott Grasett
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
>
Not a problem for me. But then, I wear gardening gloves.
--
cheers,
Elliott
Gid
generously decided to share with us..
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
If you do catch them at it, a water pistol, or even a depleted washing-
up liquid bottle full of water is a good deterrent.. cats like to dig
and the easier the soil is to dig the more they like it, so protect
freshly dug and weeded areas with pointy sticks stuck in the ground at
various angles..
The most effective way to stop other peoples' cats from crapping in
your garden though, is to get your own cat.. cats are territorial
animals and something like a large ginger tom cat will not only keep
other cats out of your garden, but will go and crap in your
neighbours' gardens as well.. :-)
--
Gid
Current Project: Bragdy'r Ddraenen Wen
(if it ever stops raining for long enough)
Brian Howlett
> does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring cats from
> crapping in one's garden?
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lion%20dung
Apparently...
--
Brian Howlett - Email to From: address deleted unseen
-------------------------------------------------------------
People who live in glass houses should undress in the dark...
Nigel Stapley
So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
*don't* always cover it up).
Nigel Stapley
> On Mon, 05 May 2008 16:21:37 +0100, Nigel Stapley wrote:
>
>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
>> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
>> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> If you are a coffee drinker, put the ground (and used) dust all over
> where the cat(s) drop their gifts. After one or two time they'll stop
> going there, and they'll hate the taste when they clean themselves.
>
One problem: I drink instant (Fairtrade, but instant all the same).
Perhaps throwing the jar at them...?
Arthur Hagen
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
Try using an Akita. They work wonders against anything smaller than a
horse.
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
Cayenne pepper allegedly works. I believe the idea is that they step in it,
then lick their paws, go "iaaooowww", and after fifty or so times of doing
that, their puny minds finally figure out that the sensation is best avoided
by not going there.
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
Scoop said gifts up and return them to your neighbour. Mailbox, top of milk
bottles, air intake on car... I'm sure you can figure something out.
Regards,
--
*Art
GaryN
news:Hs6dnf2Pmo2du4LVnZ2dnUVZ8uudnZ2d@plusnet:
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
>
> TIA
The GF and I found that laying down anti-weed fabric over the (flower)
beds, topped with a thin layer of woodchips and with the plants growing
through cut apertures, put off cats crapping in the garden.
To such an extent that *her* cat now goes and craps in the neighbour's
garden..:-)
gary
Gid
Snippetry..
> So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
> *don't* always cover it up).
A cat that doesn't at least make some attempt to cover it up is a cat
that is unwell in some way.. when I've examined spoor on lawns and the
like that people think is cat crap, it normally turns out to be fox
crap which looks very similar to the uninitiated..
Nigel Stapley
> In article <UrudnWwT5bd8_YLVRVnygwA@plusnet>, Nigel Stapley generously
> decided to share with us..
>
> Snippetry..
>
>> So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
>> *don't* always cover it up).
>
> A cat that doesn't at least make some attempt to cover it up is a cat
> that is unwell in some way.. when I've examined spoor on lawns and the
> like that people think is cat crap, it normally turns out to be fox
> crap which looks very similar to the uninitiated..
>
Should have been more precise: said cats made an effort to cover the
turds up, but obviously got lost in a reverie and missed by a few inches.
Elliott Grasett
> In article <UrudnWwT5bd8_YLVRVnygwA@plusnet>, Nigel Stapley generously
> decided to share with us..
>
> Snippetry..
>
>> So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
>> *don't* always cover it up).
>
> A cat that doesn't at least make some attempt to cover it up is a cat
> that is unwell in some way.. when I've examined spoor on lawns and the
> like that people think is cat crap, it normally turns out to be fox
> crap which looks very similar to the uninitiated..
>
leaves his faeces uncovered, as a warning to lesser breeds without
the law. Don't know if it's true, though.
--
Cheers,
Elliott
SteveD
>The most effective way to stop other peoples' cats from crapping in
>your garden though, is to get your own cat..
Wasn't there something in _The Unadulterated Cat_ about this?
-SteveD
Lizzy Taylor
I seem to recall the name "yarrgetoffoutofityoubastard" (or something
very similar) was proposed for this type of situation!
Lizzy
Robert Carnegie
Yes, that it doesn't work. I think the subject has come up before.
One theory is that cats don't so much own territory as timeshare it.
And after all, without "beating the bounds" or something with you, how
does your cat know where /your/ territorial limit is? Their use of
three-dimensional space isn't ours, even before you figure in time as
a fourth dimension of territoriality. /You/ know a hedge is a
boundary, to them it's a rain shelter.
Well, I tried little windmills - worked for a while. My theory was
that something moving puts off the necessary state of meditation.
Better when I stuck eye designs on them. And the problem seemed to
arise more when the grass was longer. Cut it short (in instalments)
and I expect it prickles when you sit down.
I also bought, but didn't paint and install, a miniature statue of a
bear, which I thought you really wouldn't want looking at you as if to
say, "Hey, these is MY woods."
CCA
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
In any case, using a catapult may injure them, and their owners are
likely to be somewhat pissed off about that. I would be.
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
Citrus fruit peel (cats don't like citrus, and neither do dogs in
fact)
Lion dung. Where you can get this from, I have no idea, but your
local RSPCA might.
Get a cat of your own. There's nothing better from stopping them
leaving their little gifts behind. My Mum the other night watched a
cat skirt carefully around our garden, probably having been chased out
enough times by our feisty-when-she-wants-to-be little cat.
CCA
Paul Ian Harman
news:b6e91b30-958b-42f3...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> In any case, using a catapult may injure them, and their owners are
> likely to be somewhat pissed off about that. I would be.
Then they should keep their cats indoors, where they won't trespass and
leave their mess on other people's property.
Paul
CCA
<chatter...@doctorwhowebguide.net> wrote:
> "CCA" <sphira9...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:b6e91b30-958b-42f3...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
A water-pistol[1] works as well as, or even better than, a catapult,
and isn't likely to injure an animal. After all, you wouldn't
catapult other animals coming into your garden, would you?
[1] With *water* in. Let's be clear about this. Nothing else.
CCA
Paul Ian Harman
> A water-pistol[1] works as well as, or even better than, a catapult,
> and isn't likely to injure an animal. After all, you wouldn't
> catapult other animals coming into your garden, would you?
I wouldn't want to hurt a cat that wandered into my garden. No, let me
rephrase that. I might take pleasure, for a few seconds after treading in
said animal's present, imagining what it might be like to wreak violence on
said animal. Not sure I'd be able to bring myself to do it if the
opportunity ever arose.
What I object to is cat-owners' collective incredulity that other people
might object to their pets wandering the streets and defecating all over the
place. No, cats do *not* bury their faeces - not all the time, not even most
of the time.
I wouldn't treat a cat wandering into my garden any differently than any
other unwanted wild animal.
Paul
The Stainless Steel Cat
Nigel Stapley <un...@judgemental.plus.com> wrote:
Do you have the same problem with bird droppings?
Cat.
--
Jazz-Loving Soul Mate and Tolerable Frog to CCA
I brought you some supper, but if you'd prefer a lecture, I've a few very
catchy ones prepped. Sin and hellfire... one has lepers.Ę
The Stainless Steel Cat
I feel the same about children and teenagers, but I don't seem to be
getting anywhere with my campaign.
Cat.
--
Jazz-Loving Soul Mate and Tolerable Frog to CCA
Two by two, hands of blue...
Arthur Hagen
> On May 5, 4:21�pm, Nigel Stapley <u...@judgemental.plus.com> wrote:
>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
>> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
>> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>>
>> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
>> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>
> In any case, using a catapult may injure them, and their owners are
> likely to be somewhat pissed off about that. I would be.
Well, don't aim at the owners, then!
Anyhow, if you let /your/ cat go on /my/ property, you are responsible for
what happens to it, not I. Not that I would catapult a cat, but I would
have no qualms rounding them up and taking them to the vet to be put down,
like any other unwanted vermin.
--
*Art
Arthur Hagen
Why should the onus be on the person who owns the garden? Will you, as a
cat owner, hand out water pistols to your neighbors, and compensate them for
the time and effort it takes to squirt water at your cats? If not, you're
imposing on their goodwill towards /your/ living toys.
--
*Art
Arthur Hagen
> In article <68bf2qF...@mid.individual.net>,
> "Paul Ian Harman" <chatt...@doctorwhowebguide.net> wrote:
>
>> "CCA" <sphir...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> news:b6e91b30-958b-42f3...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> In any case, using a catapult may injure them, and their owners are
>>> likely to be somewhat pissed off about that. I would be.
>>
>>
>> Then they should keep their cats indoors, where they won't trespass
>> and leave their mess on other people's property.
>
> I feel the same about children and teenagers, but I don't seem to be
> getting anywhere with my campaign.
Oh, I don't know. There are far more cats and dogs than children and
teenagers visiting my back yard without permission. Once the neighbors let
their teenagers go to my back yard to poop, and consider it my
responsibility to prevent it without harm to their darlings, I'll join your
campaign.
Until then, I'll keep my akita, and if anyone lets their cats, children or
missionaries into my back yard without permission, and it defends the
property, any shed blood will be on /their/ heads, not mine.
--
*Art
Lesley Weston
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
I've heard that scattering orange peel about does the trick, but I can't
say I've noticed any effect.
--
Lesley Weston
The addy above is real, but I won't see anything posted to it for a long
time. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca, adjusting as necessary.
Lesley Weston
> In article <Hs6dnf2Pmo2du4LVnZ2dnUVZ8uudnZ2d@plusnet>, Nigel Stapley
> generously decided to share with us..
>
>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>>
>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
>> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
>> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>>
>> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
>> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>>
>> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
>> object to.
>
> If you do catch them at it, a water pistol, or even a depleted washing-
> up liquid bottle full of water is a good deterrent..
That would work if you happen to be there at the time.
>cats like to dig
> and the easier the soil is to dig the more they like it, so protect
> freshly dug and weeded areas with pointy sticks stuck in the ground at
> various angles..
That's pretty nasty. Nigel said he doesn't mind the cats themselves, so
he probably doesn't want to cause them painful and possibly dangerous
injuries. Newly-dug and seeded earth can be protected by laying chicken
wire on top of it and leaving it there until the plants are
well-sprouted. Newly-weeded earth doesn't need protecting, since he
probably won't be getting his hands into it again for a while.
>
> The most effective way to stop other peoples' cats from crapping in
> your garden though, is to get your own cat.. cats are territorial
> animals and something like a large ginger tom cat will not only keep
> other cats out of your garden, but will go and crap in your
> neighbours' gardens as well.. :-)
A much better idea.
CCA
> Anyhow, if you let /your/ cat go on /my/ property, you are responsible for
> what happens to it, not I. �Not that I would catapult a cat, but I would
> have no qualms rounding them up and taking them to the vet to be put down,
> like any other unwanted vermin.
What a shame we can't do the same to you.
CCA
Chris Zakes
caused stee...@atuin.demon.co.uk (The Stainless Steel Cat) to write:
>In article <68bf2qF...@mid.individual.net>,
>"Paul Ian Harman" <chatt...@doctorwhowebguide.net> wrote:
>
>>"CCA" <sphir...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>news:b6e91b30-958b-42f3...@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> In any case, using a catapult may injure them, and their owners are
>>> likely to be somewhat pissed off about that. I would be.
>>
>>
>>Then they should keep their cats indoors, where they won't trespass and
>>leave their mess on other people's property.
>
>I feel the same about children and teenagers, but I don't seem to be
>getting anywhere with my campaign.
Maybe you need a bigger water pistol?
http://www.hasbro.com/supersoaker/default.cfm?page=browse
Or a different model of catapult?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wVADKznOhY
-Chris Zakes
Texas
"If I've reached the place where I'm a good influence on anybody, it's time I
cultivated some new vices."
-Oscar Jensen in "Space Cadet" by Robert Heinlein
Nigel Stapley
> In article <UrudnWwT5bd8_YLVRVnygwA@plusnet>,
> Nigel Stapley <un...@judgemental.plus.com> wrote:
>
>> Elliott Grasett wrote:
>>> Nigel Stapley wrote:
>>>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>>>>
>>>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
>>>> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
>>>> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>>>>
>>>> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
>>>> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>>>>
>>>> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
>>>> object to.
>>>>
>>> Not a problem for me. But then, I wear gardening gloves.
>>>
>> So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
>> *don't* always cover it up).
>
> Do you have the same problem with bird droppings?
>
No, because a) they don't accumulate in one awful lump, and b) they
don't pong so much.
Elliott Grasett
> Nigel Stapley <un...@judgemental.plus.com> wrote:
>
>> Elliott Grasett wrote:
>>> Nigel Stapley wrote:
>>>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>>>>
>>>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
>>>> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
>>>> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>>>>
>>>> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
>>>> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>>>>
>>>> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
>>>> object to.
>>>>
>>> Not a problem for me. But then, I wear gardening gloves.
>>>
>> So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
>> *don't* always cover it up).
>
> Do you have the same problem with bird droppings?
>
> Cat.
Well, no, actually, but I'm sometimes alarmed at the feathers in
the cat droppings.
--
Cheers,
Elliott
Gid
Snippetry..
> That's pretty nasty. Nigel said he doesn't mind the cats themselves, so
> he probably doesn't want to cause them painful and possibly dangerous
> injuries. Newly-dug and seeded earth can be protected by laying chicken
> wire on top of it and leaving it there until the plants are
> well-sprouted. Newly-weeded earth doesn't need protecting, since he
> probably won't be getting his hands into it again for a while.
Not nasty at all.. a few pointy sticks stuck in the ground at odd angle
make it awkward for the cat to get into a comfortable position to dig..
cats are far too intelligent to run headlong into a pointy stick and
actually cause injury.. a bit of netting (chicken wire is probably a
bit too open and would lead to the cat digging just enough to placate
the cat but not enough to placate the gardener) does the job too..
Failing that, if there are a number of cats in a given area, making a
cat toilet with a bit of unused ground within the space used by the
cats will work too.. is there a local cat owner with a bit of unused
space (say about 6' square for 20 or so cats) in their garden?.. if so,
get them to dig it over so that it's nice friable soil and cover it
liberally with Fuller's Earth.. it'll attract all cats in the area like
a magnet, won't smell, and will only need the most minor attention
(another sprinkling of Fuller's Earth) annually..
I'm lucky with my cats.. I live in a rural area and have about 26 acres
of woodland behind the house for my cats to use..
Arthur Hagen
(Who's this "we" you feel entitled to represent and speak for? Have you
become a queen?)
Feel free to have me euthanized the next time you experience my taking a
dump on your lawn.
--
*Art
CCA
> >> Anyhow, if you let /your/ cat go on /my/ property, you are
> >> responsible for what happens to it, not I. Not that I would
> >> catapult a cat, but I would have no qualms rounding them up and
> >> taking them to the vet to be put down, like any other unwanted
> >> vermin.
> > What a shame we can't do the same to you.
> (Who's this "we" you feel entitled to represent and speak for? Have you
> become a queen?)
The number of people here who've got so fed up of your trolling that
they've kf-ed you en masse.
CCA
Lesley Weston
<snip>
> Failing that, if there are a number of cats in a given area, making a
> cat toilet with a bit of unused ground within the space used by the
> cats will work too.. is there a local cat owner with a bit of unused
> space (say about 6' square for 20 or so cats) in their garden?.. if so,
> get them to dig it over so that it's nice friable soil and cover it
> liberally with Fuller's Earth.. it'll attract all cats in the area like
> a magnet, won't smell, and will only need the most minor attention
> (another sprinkling of Fuller's Earth) annually..
Some time ago, the garage at our house was replaced, starting by
breaking up and removing the concrete pad and leveling the ground, and
thus providing 15x12' of newly-dug earth. Our cats and every cat that we
knew in the neighbourhood plus a large number that we didn't know made a
point of using this ground; they must have been quite disappointed when
the new concrete was poured. So yes, this idea would work.
Andrew Nevill
>On May 7, 5:52 am, "Arthur Hagen" <a...@broomstick.com> wrote:
>> CCA <sphira9...@aol.com> wrote:
>> > On May 6, 6:31?pm, "Arthur Hagen" <a...@broomstick.com> wrote:
>>>> Not that I would
>> >> catapult a cat, but I would have no qualms rounding them up and
>> >> taking them to the vet to be put down, like any other unwanted
>> >> vermin.
>
>> > What a shame we can't do the same to you.
>
>> (Who's this "we" you feel entitled to represent and speak for? Have you
>> become a queen?)
>
>The number of people here who've got so fed up of your trolling that
>they've kf-ed you en masse.
>
>CCA
I don't believe this.
I'm about to defend Arthur
But to be fair, Arthur isn't a troll.
Occasionally he makes posts that are fun, witty and reasonable and offer
good advice.
Unfortunately, in my opinion, far too often he makes posts that are
argumentative and express views that appear calculated to annoy. It
could be that these posts represent his honest opinion. It could be that
he's looking for a reaction.
I don't care which it is but Arthur has annoyed me to often in the past
so now I avoid his posts. He's in my kill file, has been for ages and to
be honest, I can't see him climbing out
I, as I'm certain CCA does, find his casual pronouncement that he'd have
a cat - or other animal - casually put down abhorrent, but I can't
advocate doing the same to him. I suspect CCA wouldn't either but, as
someone who is devoted to her felines, has probably posted in anger.
Arthur isn't a troll - but he often resembles one.
--
Andrew Nevill B.F. D.W. FdV. Reply address: ane...@ntlworld.com
AFPWorshipper to Spooky, AFPfiance to Sarah (Nanny Ogg) & Esmeraldus.
AFPUncle to James Vaughan. You cannot value friends as pennies,
nor can you replace them as easily (Spooky in email, Aug 2001.)
Alec Cawley
> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>
> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening this
> morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping neighbouring
> cats from crapping in one's garden?
>
> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never catch
> them at it, so I need something which will have its effect passively)
>
> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave behind I
> object to.
>
Allegedly, a small quantity of lion crap has a remarkable repellent
effect, and certain zoos are selling it for the purpose.
Alec Cawley
> In article <UrudnWwT5bd8_YLVRVnygwA@plusnet>, Nigel Stapley generously
>
> Snippetry..
>
>> *don't* always cover it up).
>
> that is unwell in some way.. when I've examined spoor on lawns and the
> like that people think is cat crap, it normally turns out to be fox
> crap which looks very similar to the uninitiated..
But such attempts can be pretty poor. We have an indoor cat toilet -
simply a litter tray with a cover and swinging door. The stupider of our
cats uses it6, but then scrabbles the roof of the toilet in the attempt
to bury it. The is also not sensible enough to turn around nefore
performing, so does it in the doorway and has to step over, and
sometimes in, it it to get out.
Lizzy Taylor
One of ours has OCD when it comes to attempting to cover and scrabbles
on every surface within reach as he exits the tray (like your with cover
& swing door). Sometimes I have to bang on the box to startle him out
of his endless loop!
Lizzy
Daibhid Ceanaideach
<Cat toilets, incorrect use of>
> The is also not sensible enough to turn around
> nefore performing, so does it in the doorway and has to step over, and
> sometimes in, it it to get out.
Our cat does that sometimes. Just occasionally he'll do his business with
his rear end still *outside* the opening, and scoop litter out of the tray
onto it...
--
Dave
So I looked, and behold, a pale horse.
And the name of him who sat on it was Death.
And the name of the horse was Binky.
SeekUp
> Arthur isn't a troll - but he often resembles one.
Arthur's posts have a clinical logic and often represent the view that
wouldn't have occurred to me, and often make me re-examine my own thinking.
I value that. I guess some people do find it abrasive, but I for one would
be disappointed if he became a "nice guy".
Daniel Orner
His best posts do, that's true - but others degenerate to mean-spirited
sniping and a calculated attempt at offending either everyone at once,
or one person at a time.
Arthur Hagen
> SeekUp wrote:
>>
>> Arthur's posts have a clinical logic and often represent the view
>> that wouldn't have occurred to me, and often make me re-examine my
>> own thinking. I value that. I guess some people do find it abrasive,
>> but I for one would be disappointed if he became a "nice guy".
>
> His best posts do, that's true - but others degenerate to
> mean-spirited sniping and a calculated attempt at offending either
> everyone at once, or one person at a time.
*Completely* unaided by, e.g., your posts?
--
*Art
Lesley Weston
her cat and of all cats that you would like to have all cats killed
"like any other vermin" can't be anything but an attempt to hurt her.
And given that afp in general is fond of cats, with notable exceptions
such as yourself, it's also an attempt to hurt the whole of afp.
Unsuccessful, of course, since we all, including CCA, know what you're like.
--
Lesley Weston
The addy above is real, but I won't see anything posted to it for a long
time. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca, adjusting as necessary.
Daniel Orner
If I ever offend anyone in my posts, I can absolutely assure you it
isn't intentional, unless you mean the kind of offense that happens when
someone vehemently disagrees with me and is offended by the very idea
that I may think certain things. If I have offended anyone personally in
the past, I extend my deepest apologies.
Arthur Hagen
> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>> Daniel Orner <webm...@ffcompendium.com> wrote:
>>> SeekUp wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Arthur's posts have a clinical logic and often represent the view
>>>> that wouldn't have occurred to me, and often make me re-examine my
>>>> own thinking. I value that. I guess some people do find it
>>>> abrasive, but I for one would be disappointed if he became a "nice
>>>> guy".
>>>
>>> His best posts do, that's true - but others degenerate to
>>> mean-spirited sniping and a calculated attempt at offending either
>>> everyone at once, or one person at a time.
>>
>> *Completely* unaided by, e.g., your posts?
>>
> Arthur, telling, without provocation, someone known to be very fond of
> her cat and of all cats that you would like to have all cats killed
> "like any other vermin" can't be anything but an attempt to hurt her.
But I /didn't/ say that I wanted to have all cats killed. Learn to read.
Cats are quite OK creatures, as long as they, *like any other pets* are
prevented by their human "owners" to enter other people's property. Once
they do that, their owners have shown themselves to be incapable of taking
care of them, and euthanasia by a vet would IMO be the /kind/ option. Far
better than being torn up by my dog, or crushed under the wheel of my car.
If I had wanted to be mean-spirited towards CCA, I would have mentioned her
complete failure as a cat owner, allowing not just one, but *several* cats
to go out into traffic. She's responsible for the death of far more cats
than I am.
To quote Terry Pratchett on pets:
"... but mostly they die of us."
--
*Art
Richard Bos
> On May 6, 6:31=EF=BF=BDpm, "Arthur Hagen" <a...@broomstick.com> wrote:
>
> > Anyhow, if you let /your/ cat go on /my/ property, you are responsible for=
> > what happens to it, not I. =EF=BF=BDNot that I would catapult a cat, but I would
> > have no qualms rounding them up and taking them to the vet to be put down,=
>
> > like any other unwanted vermin.
>
> What a shame we can't do the same to you.
For once, I agree with Arthur.
Cats _are_ vermin, unless they're kept indoors. And most cat's owners
are highly naive concerning what their vermin get up to in other
people's gardens, and unwilling to take their responsibility for their
vermin. It's _your_ cat, so it should be _your_ problem. Do not make it
mine, or I might be tempted to let you share the problem.
Another blackbird murdered in my garden yesterday. I am _very_ tempted
to settle the score.
Richard
Lister
Arthur Hagen
>
> Cats _are_ vermin, unless they're kept indoors. And most cat's owners
> are highly naive concerning what their vermin get up to in other
> people's gardens, and unwilling to take their responsibility for their
> vermin. It's _your_ cat, so it should be _your_ problem. Do not make
> it mine, or I might be tempted to let you share the problem.
>
> Another blackbird murdered in my garden yesterday. I am _very_ tempted
> to settle the score.
Two days ago, I found a dead chipmunk at the bottom of my stairs. Somehow,
I doubt it had died of ripe old age right there. While I can't /prove/ that
it was the neighbor's demon pet that did it, it's by far the most likely
explanation.
(I know my dogs are innocent here, because they are not allowed off a leash
even in my back yard, precisely because of the irresponsible owners who DO
allow their pets to roam freely.)
Regards,
--
*Art
CCA
> Lesley Weston <brightly_coloured_b...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Arthur, telling, without provocation, someone known to be very fond of
> > her cat and of all cats that you would like to have all cats killed
> > "like any other vermin" can't be anything but an attempt to hurt her.
> If I had wanted to be mean-spirited towards CCA, I would have mentioned her
> complete failure as a cat owner, allowing not just one, but *several* cats
> to go out into traffic. �She's responsible for the death of far more cats
> than I am.
Arthur:
You know, I've just erased an angrier response to this, but you're
really not worth it, so I'll just leave it at 'fuck off', shall I?
Everyone else:
Anyone who doesn't believe Arthur is guilty of trolling behaviour
should just take a look at what he says above.
I wish I had a killfile.
CCA
Elliott Grasett
Sorry, Richard, I cannot agree with you. I regard cats as a selection
mechanism for smarter birds. Of course, if one buys into the Red Queen
theory of natural selection and evolution, then birds are also a
selection mechanism for smarter cats.
--
Cheers,
Elliott
Gideon
news:fvq4m3$vi7$1...@tree.broomstick.com:
> CCA <sphir...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On May 5, 4:21�pm, Nigel Stapley
>> <u...@judgemental.plus.com> wrote:
>>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>>
>>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst
>>> gardening this morning, does anyone have a reliable method
>>> of stopping neighbouring cats from crapping in one's garden?
>>>
>>> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I
>>> never catch them at it, so I need something which will have
>>> its effect passively)
>>
>> In any case, using a catapult may injure them, and their
>> owners are likely to be somewhat pissed off about that. I
>> would be.
>
> Well, don't aim at the owners, then!
>
> Anyhow, if you let /your/ cat go on /my/ property,
Since when is any part of the Earth anyone's exclusive property?
The whole idea is really pretty unsound, especially when applied to
different species; why should a cat be bound by a piece of paper
that demonstrates nothing more than your uncritical belief in an
abstract concept?
Would you also stop birds crapping on your property, or charge
earthworms a toll for entry?
Have you perhaps asserted your private property rights in a form
that a cat could understand before trespassing?
(And heck, if they bug you /that/ much, invest in a Super Soaker or
similar; it does no lasting harm.)
Gideon.
Larry Moore
What's your software situation (if it isn't too personal a question?)
--
If people never did silly things nothing intelligent would ever get
done.
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Arthur Hagen
>
> Have you perhaps asserted your private property rights in a form
> that a cat could understand before trespassing?
Yes, but some cats are too stupid or nasally challenged to understand that
the scent of Akita means it's not part of their territory.
> (And heck, if they bug you /that/ much, invest in a Super Soaker or
> similar; it does no lasting harm.)
No, I think it's the *owners'* responsibility to get and use a Super Soaker
if neccessary. Not the people who are invaded by their cats.
--
*Art
Chris Zakes
laser caused CCA <sphir...@aol.com> to write:
(snip)
>Everyone else:
>Anyone who doesn't believe Arthur is guilty of trolling behaviour
>should just take a look at what he says above.
>
>I wish I had a killfile.
>
>CCA
It's not *that* hard to manually killfile someone. Just scan through
the new posts and delete unread anything from Arthur (or those stupid
spammers, cross-posters, etc.) It takes a minute or two longer than
just opening up and starting to read, but it's much kinder on your
blood pressure.
Alternatively, Agent (as opposed to Free Agent) only costs about
$30.00 US. One of my better computer-related investments.
-Chris Zakes
Texas
"If I've reached the place where I'm a good influence on anybody, it's time I
cultivated some new vices."
-Oscar Jensen in "Space Cadet" by Robert Heinlein
Chris Zakes
<engage Darth Vader voice>
I find your level of grovelling offensive.
Robert Carnegie
> > Arthur isn't a troll - but he often resembles one.
>
>
> Arthur's posts have a clinical logic and often represent the view that
> wouldn't have occurred to me, and often make me re-examine my own thinking.
Er, yes. Perhaps file under "People who don't fully appreciate how
odd their outlook on life is." Along with me.
Arthur Hagen
> You know, I've just erased an angrier response to this, but you're
> really not worth it, so I'll just leave it at 'fuck off', shall I?
If you intend to run away from the fight crying, you shouldn't start it.
And *you* were the one who (yet again) started with ad hominem attacks, not
me.
If attacked as a person, I *will* respond. Whether I hit harder or not, or
don't play according to /your/ belief in rules, I don't throw the first
punch.
The common scenario is this:
1: Group discusses a theme that has Monsters hiding under the surface.
2: XXX attacks a commonly held position, but not any individuals.
3: YYY, who feels a strong connection to this position, attacks /not/ the
arguments, but XXX as a person.
4: XXX returns the attacks against person YYY, *ruthlessly*.
5: YYY cries foul and wants sympathy for how terrible XXX was. Creative
snipping hiding any references to the ad hominem attack in #3 is often
employed to maximize the appearance of being a victim.
6: Lesley sympathizes with the crybaby.
Far too often, XXX = Arthur and YYY = CCA.
This doesn't bother /me/ a bit -- it tends to make me laugh, especially
because after #3, it's so utterly predictable. However, it appears to upset
others.
I suggest you get your kill filter working, cause you seem unable to refrain
from taking controversial opinions personal, and start this over and over
again. I'll even *help* getting your kill filter set up if I can.
--
*Art
Geoff Field
> The Stainless Steel Cat wrote:
>> In article <UrudnWwT5bd8_YLVRVnygwA@plusnet>,
>>
>>> Elliott Grasett wrote:
>>>> Nigel Stapley wrote:
>>>>> One for ailurophiles (and others).
>>>>>
>>>>> Having had a couple of unpleasant experiences whilst gardening
>>>>> this morning, does anyone have a reliable method of stopping
>>>>> neighbouring cats from crapping in one's garden?
I've tried citronella-based products, with varied (read, limited) success.
Some people swear by putting bits of black cotton/wire around, particularly
on the fences. Apparently it makes the footing uncertain enough for a cat
to dislike it. I'm not sure I believe that, though.
One house I saw on a regular basis had a large outdoor pond, completely
covered by electrified chicken wire. Not sure how legal it was, but it
was there for years.
>>>>> (My father swore by a catapult - no pun intended - but I never
>>>>> catch them at it, so I need something which will have its effect
>>>>> passively)
I suspect your average cat would just treat this as a game.
>>>>> I don't mind them visiting, it's the little gifts they leave
>>>>> behind I object to.
>>>>>
>>>> Not a problem for me. But then, I wear gardening gloves.
>>>>
>>> So do I, but it's bad enough when you see it just lying there (they
>>> *don't* always cover it up).
>>
>> Do you have the same problem with bird droppings?
>>
>
> No, because a) they don't accumulate in one awful lump, and b) they
> don't pong so much.
Try living somewhere where pelicans fly overhead ;-)
Geoff
--
Geoff Field
Professional Geek,
Amateur Stage-Levelling Gauge
Gideon
> Gideon <diog...@freeuk.com> wrote:
>>
>> Have you perhaps asserted your private property rights in a
>> form that a cat could understand before trespassing?
>
> Yes, but some cats are too stupid or nasally challenged to
> understand that the scent of Akita means it's not part of
> their territory.
Cats are solo predators; they may perceive dogs as a danger to be
avoided (depending on the dog); they don't perceive them as a
direct challenge to be confronted.
Cats, like people, really don't recognise the concept of 'my turf'
as applying to other species as well.
You could always get a cat yourself - get something big and hairy
and the neighbouring cat would suddenly stop hanging around in your
garden.
>> (And heck, if they bug you /that/ much, invest in a Super
>> Soaker or similar; it does no lasting harm.)
>
> No, I think it's the *owners'* responsibility to get and use a
> Super Soaker if neccessary. Not the people who are invaded by
> their cats.
I think that, when it comes to cats, the word 'owner' is perhaps
less applicable than it is to any other domesticated animal.
And like most animals, they don't really do a great deal of
abstract conceptualising about where they should and shouldn't be.
As the property owner (philosophical arguments aside), it is your
duty to enforce your property rights; and if (as you appear to
believe) cats can have 'owners', then it is the owners you should
be taking this up with - not the cats themselves.
As per TUC;
"Punishment has no effect on Real cats. This is because Real cats
don't associate the punishment with the crime. As far as they're
concerned, shouting, slippers on a low trajectory and being talked
to in a loud, patient voice are all manifestations of the general
weirdness of the blobs. All you have to do to survive it is cower a
wee bit and look big-eyed, and then get on with your life."
Gideon.
Dom
> CCA <sphir...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> You know, I've just erased an angrier response to this, but you're
>> really not worth it
>
>
People comment and killfile him.
Arthur does whiny brat thing.
> I suggest you get your kill filter working, cause you seem unable to refrain
> from taking controversial opinions personal, and start this over and over
> again. I'll even *help* getting your kill filter set up if I can.
Tell you what. Make it simpler for all of us and just bog off?
After all, on a signal-to-noise ratio, you're posts are mostly noise.
--
Dom
CCA
> CCA <sphira9...@aol.com> wrote:
> > You know, I've just erased an angrier response to this, but you're
> > really not worth it, so I'll just leave it at 'fuck off', shall I?
> If you intend to run away from the fight crying, you shouldn't start it.
> And *you* were the one who (yet again) started with ad hominem attacks, not
> me.
Um...how does 'fuck off' equate to 'running away crying'? When I tell
someone to fuck off, I'm *angry*, not upset. You called me a bad cat
owner (which I'm not), I got angry. Seems fair enough to me. If I
called you a bad dog owner (which I shouldn't think is true either),
I'm sure you would get angry too.
> If attacked as a person, I *will* respond.
So will I, and I have done, many times, usually to other people than
you. And if someone says something I believe to be inflammatory, I
will also respond, and I'm not the only one who does so, either.
>�Whether I hit harder or not, or
> don't play according to /your/ belief in rules, I don't throw the first
> punch.
*blink* I've seen you throw the first punch dozens of times.
> The common scenario is this:
>
> 1: Group discusses a theme that has Monsters hiding under the surface.
> 2: XXX attacks a commonly held position, but not any individuals.
> 3: YYY, who feels a strong connection to this position, attacks /not/ the
> arguments, but XXX as a person.
> 4: XXX returns the attacks against person YYY, *ruthlessly*.
> 5: YYY cries foul and wants sympathy
Hang on...did I say I wanted sympathy? I said you were trolling, and
pointed out an example of the same to others who disagreed. And then
I told you to fuck off - how's that asking for sympathy?
And indeed, if you think for one moment my comment of 'What a shame we
can't do the same to you' was in any way an intention to actually
round you up and have you put down, then you appear to be the one with
a sensitivity problem, not me.
for how terrible XXX was. �Creative
> snipping hiding any references to the ad hominem attack in #3 is often
> employed to maximize the appearance of being a victim.
> 6: Lesley sympathizes with the crybaby.
In what way have I acted as a crybaby? I haven't become upset, just
angry. Do you call everyone who tells you to fuck off a crybaby?
> Far too often, XXX = Arthur and YYY = CCA.
> This doesn't bother /me/ a bit -- it tends to make me laugh, especially
> because after #3, it's so utterly predictable. �
You mean we lock horns quite a bit? Yes, we do. Put a couple of
hundred people in a newsgroup and you're bound to get some who don't
get on together.
Unfortunately, predictable has become a word I'd use with regard to
quite a lot of threads you contribute to, where a perfectly normal
conversation takes place until you pile in with a comment that seems
designed to be inflammatory. To be fair, you're not the only person
on afp who does this. When others do so, I'd be just as likely to
reply to them, and so would others.
Now, I'm sure you will agree that this is getting boring. I don't
know what the weather's like with you, but it's a beautiful sunny day
here, and I'd rather spend it gardening than arguing with you (or
anyone else). I'm sure you'd rather spend the time with your dogs
than arguing with me. So shall we leave this?
CCA
Larry Moore
Since I don't think I've seen you post before, let me be the first to
say welcome to afp!
Feed the cat chocolate or however it goes ...
--
"A mouse is a device used to point at the xterm you want to type in."
Kim Alm, a.s.r
Dom
> On 2008-05-10, Dom <dom...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
<snip>
> Since I don't think I've seen you post before, let me be the first to
> say welcome to afp!
>
> Feed the cat chocolate or however it goes ...
Well, I don't post that often, but I've been here for about 8 years
now.
Thanks for the chocolate though :-)
--
Dom
Lister
wrote:
I concur with this, CCA. Buy Agent, you won't regret it
Len Oil
> It's not *that* hard to manually killfile someone. Just scan through
> the new posts and delete unread anything from Arthur (or those stupid
> spammers, cross-posters, etc.) It takes a minute or two longer than
> just opening up and starting to read, but it's much kinder on your
> blood pressure.
That might work with CCA's GoogleGroups[0] (I believe it is) interface,
though it wouldn't be satisfactory in the event that the feeling is "I
don't want to trouble myself for/remind myself of person <foo>".
> Alternatively, Agent (as opposed to Free Agent) only costs about
> $30.00 US. One of my better computer-related investments.
I don't know if CCA is possessive of a standard client-accessible
newsfeed[1], but OE/Thunderbird[2]/numerous other solutions do exist for
no client-side cost.
Of course, back on the "not wanting to trouble oneself" track, it might
be understandable if a person would be more inclined to abandon an
uncomfortable place[3] than to vastly modify their (normally
comfortable) method of obtaining access to that location.
[0] I know not how GG works. In this case /I/ am comfortable and
conservative.
[1] news.individual.net is an oft-touted one in this locale, having very
low cost, as well as LSpace's own limited but (in this case) sufficient
feed. I'd be surprised if Thunderbird and/or Firefox hadn't at least an
/inefficient/ plug-in or two to mediate GoogleGroups interaction. Which
at least works until[4] GG's next development becomes default and
requires a rewrite to handle the changes.
[2] Regardless of the occasional "It doesn't work quite like OE" comment
by me, I like it. ;)
[3] a) I would hope that never needs to become the case; b) I'm not
making judgement upon any specific protagonist/antagonist pairing, just
being general about it.
[4] Had originally put "while", in the Yorkshire sense. As in the old
joke about the teacher who said "You'll never learn anything while you
listen to me." ;)
Larry Moore
private? Please? I don't know where to look and feel embarrassed.
Thanks.
--
The word "belief" is a difficult thing for me. I don't believe. I must
have a reason for a certain hypothesis. Either I know a thing, and then
I know it - I don't need to believe it.
Carl Jung
Paul Ian Harman
news:g01vpo$4t3$1...@tree.broomstick.com...
> Cats are quite OK creatures, as long as they, *like any other pets* are
> prevented by their human "owners" to enter other people's property.
Agreed.
> Once they do that, their owners have shown themselves to be incapable of
> taking care of them [...] Far better than being torn up by my dog, or
> crushed under the wheel of my car.
"incapable" is perhaps rather provocative wording, but I tend to agree. Cat
owners really shouldn't be aghast what happens to their cats when they are
out of their supervision - if they want them to be safe, it's up to them to
ensure that safety. It doesn't mean that they aren't entitled to get upset
if something does happen to their pet, though. Allowing the cat to roam
freely isn't the *cause* of any harm that might come. Accidents happen...
and anyone causing deliberate harm to the cats is more responsible for that
harm than the owners.
But you make a good point - cats are the only pet that society lets roam
free. I wish they didn't.
Paul
Paul Ian Harman
news:Xns9A9A6860DA575...@131.155.141.97...
> You could always get a cat yourself - get something big and hairy
> and the neighbouring cat would suddenly stop hanging around in your
> garden.
Ah, I see. "If you hate cats, get a cat". Makes perfect sense.
I'm allergic to cats. They know it, because they are drawn to me by some
mysterious magnetic-like force, away from those who are happy to play with
them. So getting a cat of my own is not high on my to-do list. Indeed, the
idea of having to go to any expense because of the carelessness of other pet
owners to allow their animal free rein to defecate all over my lawn is
rather lost on me.
Paul
Lesley Weston
> Lesley Weston <brightly_co...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>>> Daniel Orner <webm...@ffcompendium.com> wrote:
>>>> SeekUp wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Arthur's posts have a clinical logic and often represent the view
>>>>> that wouldn't have occurred to me, and often make me re-examine my
>>>>> own thinking. I value that. I guess some people do find it
>>>>> abrasive, but I for one would be disappointed if he became a "nice
>>>>> guy".
>>>>
>>>> His best posts do, that's true - but others degenerate to
>>>> mean-spirited sniping and a calculated attempt at offending either
>>>> everyone at once, or one person at a time.
>>>
>>> *Completely* unaided by, e.g., your posts?
>>>
>> Arthur, telling, without provocation, someone known to be very fond of
>> her cat and of all cats that you would like to have all cats killed
>> "like any other vermin" can't be anything but an attempt to hurt her.
>
> But I /didn't/ say that I wanted to have all cats killed. Learn to read.
<snip>
>
> If I had wanted to be mean-spirited towards CCA,
<snip>
I hope CCA really has killfiled Arthur, and thus did not read the
nastiness that I have snipped. I apologise for giving him the
opportunity to attack her and the rest of us again. I should have
foreseen it, of course, but I have this silly optimism about the human
race, believing that people wouldn't *really* do such things, not
*really*...
--
Lesley Weston
The addy above is real, but I won't see anything posted to it for a long
time. To reach me, use leswes att shaw dott ca, adjusting as necessary.
Lesley Weston
> "Gideon" <diog...@freeuk.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9A9A6860DA575...@131.155.141.97...
>> You could always get a cat yourself - get something big and hairy
>> and the neighbouring cat would suddenly stop hanging around in your
>> garden.
>
>
> Ah, I see. "If you hate cats, get a cat". Makes perfect sense.
>
> I'm allergic to cats.
So is my husband, so we make sure that our cats past, present and future
don't sleep on his pillow, and he's careful about washing his hands
after petting them. If you don't want a cat, obviously you shouldn't
have one, but allergies are irrelevant: I'm allergic to tree pollen, but
we're not going to cut down all the trees in our yard.
>They know it, because they are drawn to me by some
> mysterious magnetic-like force, away from those who are happy to play with
> them. So getting a cat of my own is not high on my to-do list. Indeed, the
> idea of having to go to any expense because of the carelessness of other pet
> owners to allow their animal free rein to defecate all over my lawn is
> rather lost on me.
They don't often use lawns, preferring somewhere hidden and with soft
soil that's easy to scratch.
CCA
> I don't know if CCA is possessive of a standard client-accessible
> newsfeed[1], but OE/Thunderbird[2]/numerous other solutions do exist for
> no client-side cost.
I'm with news.individual.net, which I use on my own computer with OE
and quotefix. (That's as well as Google Groups). This one I'm
posting from is my parents' one, for the main reason that it's
downstairs in the cool and this is a hot day :-)
I haven't fully explored OE yet, but I will.
CCA
CCA
> Larry Moore wrote:
> > On 2008-05-10, Dom <dom...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> <snip>
> > Since I don't think I've seen you post before, let me be the first to
> > say welcome to afp!
> > Feed the cat chocolate or however it goes ...
Feed the Dom chocolate, more likely...
> Well, I don't post that often, but I've been here for about 8 years
> now.
>
> Thanks for the chocolate though :-)
ISTR Dom being one of my first afpfriends years ago, along with
Stainless Steel Cat and one or two others.
CCA
CCA
> Is there any way that the two of you can get a room and do this in
> private? Please? I don't know where to look and feel embarrassed.
>
> Thanks.
If that was in any way aimed at me, I'm done talking to Arthur now,
and I'm sure he's done talking to me too. See my post about both
having better things to do.
CCA
April Goodwin-Smith
> Paul Ian Harman wrote:
>> <snip> Indeed, the idea of having to go to any expense
>> because of the carelessness of other pet owners to allow
>> their animal free rein to defecate all over my lawn is rather lost on me.
> They don't often use lawns, preferring somewhere hidden
> and with soft soil that's easy to scratch.
>
Er. They will use lawns if the grass is long enough, or if the
clippings from the last mowing are left on the lawn. One of
our cats used to use drifts of leaves.
April.
Larry Moore
Much appreciated.
--
Mistakes are, after all, the foundations of truth, and if a man does not
know what a thing is, it is at least an increase in knowledge if he
knows what it is not.
Carl Jung
Michael Huber
> So is my husband, so we make sure that our cats past, present and future
> don't sleep on his pillow, and he's careful about washing his hands
> after petting them.
Then, your husband is lucky to only have a mild allergy. I cannot enter a
house a cat even sporadically lives in or sit next to a person who owns a
cat and whose clothing has come into contact with the cat after the last
wash (e.g. (s)he played with the cat after dressing) without getting
red-shot and very itchy eyes. It's quite uncomfortable, I tell you. Horses
are worse, I can spot the presence of a horse stable by my eyes getting
itchy even several hundred meters away (and I have in the past correctly
detected the presence of a horse stable in the area like that without being
able to see the stable or even knowing it existed, so psychosomatic it
ain't). If I get nearer, the itch gets so bad it actually hurts. Don't even
get me started about rabbits.
With dogs, similar precautions to those your hausband takes for cats
suffice. Which is fortunate, because I actually like dogs.
Seriuosly, though, keep cats and anything cat-related away from me. Their
physical presence is uncomfortable. So "get a cat to keep the cats away"
isn't even remotely an option, and a dog would probably not be wise either.
Geoff Field
> Lesley Weston wrote:
>
>> So is my husband, so we make sure that our cats past, present and
>> future don't sleep on his pillow, and he's careful about washing his
>> hands after petting them.
>
> Then, your husband is lucky to only have a mild allergy. I cannot
> enter a house a cat even sporadically lives in or sit next to a
> person who owns a cat and whose clothing has come into contact with
> the cat after the last wash (e.g. (s)he played with the cat after
> dressing) without getting red-shot and very itchy eyes. It's quite
> uncomfortable, I tell you.
One of my sons is allergic to *one* particular cat. This one happens
to belong to my wife's sister, which makes visiting my son's cousin
rather tricky. My son has to drug up first.
It could be some product my sister-in-law uses on her cat, or it
could be the breed of cat.
[snip]
Geoff Field
> "Arthur Hagen" <a...@broomstick.com> wrote in message
> news:g01vpo$4t3$1...@tree.broomstick.com...
>> Cats are quite OK creatures, as long as they, *like any other pets*
>> are prevented by their human "owners" to enter other people's
>> property.
> Agreed.
Or from entering areas where defenseless, protected animals are
likely to be brutally hunted for the cats' sport. Here in XXXX,
where we don't have a lot of large carnivores to teach animals
how to defend themselves (particularly in the South East, where
there aren't a lot of dingos and there are no crocs in the wild),
introduced vermin such as foxes and cats are a major source
of death of native animals.
In certain areas, it's actually an *offence* under local council
by-laws to allow one's cat to roam at night.
>> Once they do that, their owners have shown themselves to be
>> incapable of taking care of them [...] Far better than being torn up
>> by my dog, or crushed under the wheel of my car.
>
> "incapable" is perhaps rather provocative wording, but I tend to
> agree. Cat owners really shouldn't be aghast what happens to their
> cats when they are out of their supervision - if they want them to be
> safe, it's up to them to ensure that safety.
Definitely agree.
> It doesn't mean that
> they aren't entitled to get upset if something does happen to their
> pet, though. Allowing the cat to roam freely isn't the *cause* of any
> harm that might come. Accidents happen... and anyone causing
> deliberate harm to the cats is more responsible for that harm than
> the owners.
> But you make a good point - cats are the only pet that society lets
> roam free. I wish they didn't.
As I said, in some parts here, it's illegal. People do it anyway and
then get upset when the council charges them money for the return
of their little, fluffy killer.
8'FED
> I haven't fully explored OE yet, but I will.
If you want tips, I for one am happy to help if I can, by describing
the features that I use most often and how I use them.
I prefer OE over all the other newsreaders I've tried, although (with
one exception) I didn't actually write down *why* I didn't like the
others.
Adrian.
Michael Huber
> It could be some product my sister-in-law uses on her cat, or it
> could be the breed of cat.
I never heard of a specific only-this-breed cat allergy, I do not think that
cat saliva* varies that much from breed to breed. Perhaps you can try to
get your sister-in-law to change shampoos and see if that helps.
*) The allergy is not caused by hairs, but by certain components of a cat's
saliva. When a cat cleans itself, the saliva dries on the hairs, and tiny
salvia-carrying specks of hair are the problem. So it's hair+saliva =
allergy.
Lister
Geoff Field
We've just been there for Mothers' Day celebrations. While the
kids were out, I had the cat on my lap for a while (while I chatted
with my mother - who's no longer young). Even the remnants on
my pants were enough to affect my son.
Yes, it could be some of the chemicals my sister-in-law uses on
the cat. I'm not sure what she uses (or how - how does one wash
a cat, exactly?), but it's likely that a flea treatment or something
could be the cause.
The Stainless Steel Cat
> Yes, it could be some of the chemicals my sister-in-law uses on
> the cat. I'm not sure what she uses (or how - how does one wash
> a cat, exactly?),
You don't, they're self cleaning.
Cat.
8'FED
> 8'FED wrote:
>>I prefer OE over all the other newsreaders I've tried, although (with
>>one exception) I didn't actually write down *why* I didn't like the
>>others.
>
> Which was your exception?
Dialog http://www.40tude.com/dialog/index.htm which was recommended
here on afp back in 2005, so I tried it at the time and then posted
about why it was no good compared to OE.
Answers in brief:
* Very complex program in conjunction with very poor help facility
* Help facility, poor as it is, inaccessible when dialogue boxes open
* No option to view messages posted during the last N days
* No option to toggle threading on and off
--
Recent blog posts: <http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/>. A post randomly
selected from the archives: <http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/?random>.
Robert Carnegie
> If I had wanted to be mean-spirited towards CCA, -
As apparently now you did, and I wish you hadn't. Very few moral
authorities commend mean-spiritedness except in some particular
circumstances where sympathy and mercy are considered sinful (witches,
Canaanites), and I don't think this was such a case.
Lesley Weston
I'm surprised. Cats are sensible creatures who don't do more work than
they need to. Having spent the last few years digging up pieces of the
lawn with a mattock and spade to increase the vegetable-growing area, a
small piece each year because of the huge difficulty of digging
established grassland, I admire any cat that can manage it with just claws.
Drifts of leaves are much easier for them, and provide the reason why I
know that orange peel doesn't work in discouraging cats from crapping.
Much as I love cats, I agree with Nigel about the unpleasantness of
discovering the little gifts they leave - both crap, as Nigel describes,
and dead creatures left thoughtfully by one's bed.
Lesley Weston
> Lesley Weston wrote:
>
>> So is my husband, so we make sure that our cats past, present and future
>> don't sleep on his pillow, and he's careful about washing his hands
>> after petting them.
>
> Then, your husband is lucky to only have a mild allergy. I cannot enter a
> house a cat even sporadically lives in or sit next to a person who owns a
> cat and whose clothing has come into contact with the cat after the last
> wash (e.g. (s)he played with the cat after dressing) without getting
> red-shot and very itchy eyes. It's quite uncomfortable, I tell you. Horses
> are worse, I can spot the presence of a horse stable by my eyes getting
> itchy even several hundred meters away (and I have in the past correctly
> detected the presence of a horse stable in the area like that without being
> able to see the stable or even knowing it existed, so psychosomatic it
> ain't). If I get nearer, the itch gets so bad it actually hurts. Don't even
> get me started about rabbits.
I'm sorry to hear that. Have you tried all the different
anti-histamines? I find that some of them make a huge difference to the
same symptoms plus an overwhelming cough that I experience when affected
by tree pollens, some mould spores or wood smoke.
>
> With dogs, similar precautions to those your hausband takes for cats
> suffice. Which is fortunate, because I actually like dogs.
>
> Seriuosly, though, keep cats and anything cat-related away from me. Their
> physical presence is uncomfortable. So "get a cat to keep the cats away"
> isn't even remotely an option, and a dog would probably not be wise either.
If you don't want a cat (or any other animal), whatever the reason, you
shouldn't have one.
Lesley Weston
> Michael Huber wrote:
>> Geoff Field wrote:
>>> It could be some product my sister-in-law uses on her cat, or it
>>> could be the breed of cat.
>> I never heard of a specific only-this-breed cat allergy, I do not
>> think that cat saliva* varies that much from breed to breed. Perhaps
>> you can try to get your sister-in-law to change shampoos and see if
>> that helps.
>>
>> *) The allergy is not caused by hairs, but by certain components of a
>> cat's saliva. When a cat cleans itself, the saliva dries on the
>> hairs, and tiny salvia-carrying specks of hair are the problem. So
>> it's hair+saliva = allergy.
>
> We've just been there for Mothers' Day celebrations. While the
> kids were out, I had the cat on my lap for a while (while I chatted
> with my mother - who's no longer young). Even the remnants on
> my pants were enough to affect my son.
>
> Yes, it could be some of the chemicals my sister-in-law uses on
> the cat. I'm not sure what she uses (or how - how does one wash
> a cat, exactly?),
One doesn't, unless there's a really serious infestation of fleas, and
even then a drop of Advantage or whatever works better and is less
traumatic for the cat and its owner.
but it's likely that a flea treatment or something
> could be the cause.
That is quite possible. Pyrethrum, the main constituent of many flea
powders, is considered "organic" and therefore safe for the cat and for
humans, but some people are seriously allergic to it.
Lesley Weston
> Paul Ian Harman wrote:
>> "Arthur Hagen" <a...@broomstick.com> wrote in message
>> news:g01vpo$4t3$1...@tree.broomstick.com...
>>> Cats are quite OK creatures, as long as they, *like any other pets*
>>> are prevented by their human "owners" to enter other people's
>>> property.
>> Agreed.
>
> Or from entering areas where defenseless, protected animals are
> likely to be brutally hunted for the cats' sport.
If you're a vegetarian, that argument carries some weight as a reason to
hate all cats, dogs, humans and other carnivores, but if you're not it
doesn't. There's no difference between a cat killing a bird for its own
amusement and food and a human killing a deer for their own amusement
and food. Neither is there any ethical difference between these things
and a cat eating canned cat food consisting of animals killed for it by
humans or a human eating a steak from an animal killed for them by other
humans.
I'm fond of birds, and I mind whenever our cat brings one in, but
there's no way I would restrict the cat's activities, beyond keeping her
in at night to protect her from coyotes and raccoons. One of the reasons
why those who prefer cats to dogs do so is that while dogs are servants,
cats are free spirits. Of course, there are situations where it's just
not possible to let cats roam freely, but where it is possible there's
just no excuse for trying to turn them into dogs. Not that there's
anything wrong with dogs so long as they *are* dogs.
Nigel Stapley
> April Goodwin-Smith wrote:
>> "Lesley Weston" wrote...
>>> Paul Ian Harman wrote:
>>>> <snip> Indeed, the idea of having to go to any expense
>>>> because of the carelessness of other pet owners to allow
>>>> their animal free rein to defecate all over my lawn is rather lost
>>>> on me.
>>> They don't often use lawns, preferring somewhere hidden
>>> and with soft soil that's easy to scratch.
>>>
>>
>> Er. They will use lawns if the grass is long enough, or if the
>> clippings from the last mowing are left on the lawn. One of
>> our cats used to use drifts of leaves.
>
> I'm surprised. Cats are sensible creatures who don't do more work than
> they need to.
April's point, I think, was that they won't bother to dig if the grass
is long enough. They will just deposit and depart. This I have also
found to be true.
--
Regards
Nigel Stapley
<reply-to will bounce>
Arthur Hagen
> Michael Huber wrote:
>>
>> Seriuosly, though, keep cats and anything cat-related away from me.
>> Their physical presence is uncomfortable. So "get a cat to keep the
>> cats away" isn't even remotely an option, and a dog would probably
>> not be wise either.
>
> If you don't want a cat (or any other animal), whatever the reason,
> you shouldn't have one.
And quite often, if you want a cat (or any other animal), you still
shouldn't have one. You need to both want the pet, have the will to take
care of it, have the ability to take care of it, and have enough
stubbornness to keep doing so even when inconvenient. Far too often, one of
the three latter will be lacking, and mostly the last one.
Purring and playful kittens are cute, no doubts about it. Wrestling a sick
grown-up pissed-off ball of claws, cleaning your neighbour's flower urn and
visitors' boots, or washing cat brain off the pavement are not such adorable
experiences. Don't go for the former without being prepared to handle the
latter.
--
*Art
Richard Bos
> Richard Bos wrote:
> > Cats _are_ vermin, unless they're kept indoors. And most cat's owners
> > are highly naive concerning what their vermin get up to in other
> > people's gardens, and unwilling to take their responsibility for their
> > vermin. It's _your_ cat, so it should be _your_ problem. Do not make it
> > mine, or I might be tempted to let you share the problem.
> >
> > Another blackbird murdered in my garden yesterday. I am _very_ tempted
> > to settle the score.
>
> Sorry, Richard, I cannot agree with you. I regard cats as a selection
> mechanism for smarter birds.
I'd agree with that if these were natural cats, but they aren't. Do you
also regard global warming as a selection mechanism for smarter polar
bears, or Winchester rifles as a selection mechanism for smarter bison?
I have no problems with forest cats catching birds for a living, no more
than I have a problem with the sparrow-hawk which chased pigeons in my
garden last year (or was it the year before?). Those are natural, and
need to eat; and they kill what they want to eat, and eat what they
kill. Not so domestic cats. They're pampered to the extent that many are
desperately in need of _less_ food, and yet they kill birds that they
will not eat, just because they are vermin. I regard them as lowly as I
regard "sports" fishermen who don't eat what they catch.
Richard
peachy ashie passion
On Sat, 10 May 2008 13:48:01 +0100, Lister <fa...@SPAMclara.net>
wrote:
>On Fri, 09 May 2008 19:06:26 -0500, Chris Zakes <dont...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 9 May 2008 14:12:10 -0700 (PDT), an orbital mind-control
>>laser caused CCA <sphir...@aol.com> to write:
>>
>>(snip)
>>
>>>Everyone else:
>>>Anyone who doesn't believe Arthur is guilty of trolling behaviour
>>>should just take a look at what he says above.
>>>
>>>I wish I had a killfile.
>>>
>>>CCA
>>
>>It's not *that* hard to manually killfile someone. Just scan through
>>the new posts and delete unread anything from Arthur (or those stupid
>>spammers, cross-posters, etc.) It takes a minute or two longer than
>>just opening up and starting to read, but it's much kinder on your
>>blood pressure.
>>
>>Alternatively, Agent (as opposed to Free Agent) only costs about
>>$30.00 US. One of my better computer-related investments.
>>
>> -Chris Zakes
>> Texas
>>
>>"If I've reached the place where I'm a good influence on anybody, it's time I
>>cultivated some new vices."
>>
>> -Oscar Jensen in "Space Cadet" by Robert Heinlein
>
>
>I concur with this, CCA. Buy Agent, you won't regret it
Let me suggest that first you take advantage of the free trial
period.
I'm on about day 10 of it, and so far I really hate Agent. Tastes
differ. :)
8'FED
> Geoff Field wrote:
>> Or from entering areas where defenseless, protected animals are
>> likely to be brutally hunted for the cats' sport.
>
> If you're a vegetarian, that argument carries some weight as a reason to hate
> all cats, dogs, humans and other carnivores, but if you're not it doesn't.
> There's no difference between a cat killing a bird for its own amusement and
> food and a human killing a deer for their own amusement and food.
Now _that's_ the sort of statement that can generate lively ... um ...
discussion. I think this is a case of you not thinking before posting,
unless you really believe its inconsistent to be non-vegetarian and
support anti-poaching laws. There's a reason why Geoff used the word
"protected", you know.
Adrian.
Chris Zakes
They do, indeed. I'd been using Free Agent for several years before
buying Agent, so the differences to me were fairly minor.
Alternatively, this method was offered by someone on one of the other
groups I read:
1 Install Firefox, which you can get from the Mozilla site.
This is to be able to get the extension you need.
2 Install the Greasemonkey extension( get it from
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/748 )
3 Get the Google Groups killfile script from
http://www.penney.org/google-groups-killfile-updated-2.html
and load it using greasemonkey.
4 When you browse and see a thread/post by anyone you dislike
simply click the new 'ignore user' link in the thread and all
threads/posts from them will be no longer visible. WARNING:
You'll need to manually add people who have apostrophes in
their names into the killfile manually. This is done by typing
in about:config into the URL bar.
5 Enjoy spamfree browsing.
I haven't tried this myself, but several other posters who use Google
Groups say it worked for them.
Arthur Hagen
> Arthur Hagen wrote:
>> If I had wanted to be mean-spirited towards CCA, -
>
> As apparently now you did, and I wish you hadn't.
Me too. While I didn't start it (wishing me dead was pretty mean-spirited
too), I did continue, for which I apologize to the group. I was wrong in
doing so, and doubly wrong for doing so in a reply to Lesley.
> Very few moral
> authorities commend mean-spiritedness except in some particular
> circumstances where sympathy and mercy are considered sinful (witches,
> Canaanites), and I don't think this was such a case.
Well, I do not know whether CCA is a Canaanite or not, but it doesn't
matter:
I believe that "sin" is a mental disease in the one who /sees/ it, not the
one who does it.
Regards,
--
*Art
8'FED
> I haven't tried this myself, but several other posters who use Google
> Groups say it worked for them.
I think lack of a killfile is the least of the problems with trying to
use Google Groups as a newsreader. Far more crippling, I think, is the
impossibility of keeping track of where you're up to in a conversation.
Adrian.
Carol Hague
PIggybacking for reasons that will shortly become apparent...
I'm only seeing Chris Zakes' posts when someone quotes them. I haven't
killfiled him (or at least not on purpose :-)), so I'm wondering if
other people using news.individual.net can see his posts?
If they can it's probably something daft I've done that's preventing me
from seeing them...
--
Carol
"If you are allergic to a thing, it is best not to put
that thing in your mouth. Particularly if the thing is
cats." - Lemony Snicket _The Wide Window_
Eric Jarvis
dont...@gmail.com says...
> On Sun, 11 May 2008 22:10:55 GMT, an orbital mind-control laser
> caused peachy ashie passion <exquisi...@hotmail.com> to write:
>
> > I'm on about day 10 of it, and so far I really hate Agent. Tastes
> >differ. :)
>
> They do, indeed. I'd been using Free Agent for several years before
> buying Agent, so the differences to me were fairly minor.
>
Oddly enough I'd been using Free Agent for several years when I switched
to Gravity, so the differences were significant, but to me just about all
positive.
It's worth trying free versions of several newsreaders. There are many
that are excellent. It just depends on what you require.
--
eric
"live fast, die only if strictly necessary"
Lister
wrote:
>8'FED <dra...@netyp.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Chris Zakes wrote:
>>
>> > I haven't tried this myself, but several other posters who use Google
>> > Groups say it worked for them.
>>
>> I think lack of a killfile is the least of the problems with trying to
>> use Google Groups as a newsreader. Far more crippling, I think, is the
>> impossibility of keeping track of where you're up to in a conversation.
>
>PIggybacking for reasons that will shortly become apparent...
>
>I'm only seeing Chris Zakes' posts when someone quotes them. I haven't
>killfiled him (or at least not on purpose :-)), so I'm wondering if
>other people using news.individual.net can see his posts?
>
>If they can it's probably something daft I've done that's preventing me
>from seeing them...
I'm on individual, and I can see them.
Which newsreader do you have?