In Support of Monica

I have been following some of the messages concerning Monica with a
combination of sadness and anger. Monica has a long history on the
newsgroup, and many of you should be well aware that a cat's best interest
is always foremost on her mind. You can tell a lot about a person by that
person's posting history, and Monica has always shown an uncompromising
dedication to the welfare of cats - all cats, not just her own. She has been
consistent in her posting and her high values.

I do not for one moment believe the negative spin that some people on this
NG have cast on her role in the Conan saga. As far as I recall, Monica
became involved only after Mary posted that she could not save this cat. The
cat has now been rescued from the OC shelter and is in no danger of
euthanasia. If you have read the lengthy email messages that were posted,
you might notice that the original group first talked about saving Conan
from OC, and they were willing at that time to board him while they looked
for a home. Why are people now rushing to get him into a home - one that
might be inadequate - when he is obviously safe and is being well-cared-for?
It is better to take the time to select a good home than to "rush to
judgment." I haven't seen the correspondence between Monica and the homes
that were offered, but she clearly doesn't feel that they are appropriate -
and I accept her judgment. I'm sure that Monica has made sure that Conan is
receiving excellent care. I never like to think of a cat spending time in a
kennel, but it is far better to spend a little extra time now to make sure
he will eventually be adopted by someone who will love him and give him the
best of care for his entire life than to accept a home simply to "get him
out of there quickly." Conan is a young cat, and a relatively short time in
a kennel or boarding situation is a drop in the bucket out of a cat's
lifetime. It would be tragic if things were rushed and Conan were adopted by
the wrong people and then either neglected or returned once again - as has
already happened to him once. As a former board member of the Humane
Society, I completely agree with the way Monica is handling things and would
do things no differently. One of my tasks when I served on the board of
directors was to conduct follow-up investigations of homes where cats and
dogs had been adopted. I was appalled by some of the circumstances I saw.
These were people who had been screened by the animal shelter, but they made
some grievous errors in releasing these helpless animals without doing
adequate background investigations. This is a situation that Monica
obviously hopes to avoid!

Vilifying someone who clearly has Conan's best interest at heart is
something I simply don't understand. I'm glad that Monica's group is now
looking out for Conan's welfare. This has become a petty flame war, and
Monica is wise not to let herself become embroiled in answering every
question that someone on this group raises. I have stayed pretty much out of
the controversy and have posted only a very limited number of messages
because I have been so disgusted at the low levels to which the dialog has
sunk, but this has gone on for so long that I think it is important for
someone to point out the good work that Monica is doing and to let her know
that she has supporters on the newsgroup. I am one of them!

MaryL

Everyone helped SOW, but now only one gets
the joy and pleasure of finding Conan a home?


MaryL wrote:
I have been following some of the messages concerning Monica with a
combination of sadness and anger. Monica has a long history on the
newsgroup, and many of you should be well aware that a cat's best interest
is always foremost on her mind. You can tell a lot about a person by that
person's posting history, and Monica has always shown an uncompromising
dedication to the welfare of cats - all cats, not just her own. She has been
consistent in her posting and her high values.

Fair Enough


I do not for one moment believe the negative spin that some people on this
NG have cast on her role in the Conan saga. As far as I recall, Monica
became involved only after Mary posted that she could not save this cat.

Don't forget Mary Did put up the earnest money.

The
cat has now been rescued from the OC shelter and is in no danger of
euthanasia. If you have read the lengthy email messages that were posted,
you might notice that the original group first talked about saving Conan
from OC, and they were willing at that time to board him while they looked
for a home. Why are people now rushing to get him into a home - one that
might be inadequate - when he is obviously safe and is being well-cared-for?
It is better to take the time to select a good home than to "rush to
judgment." I haven't seen the correspondence between Monica and the homes
that were offered, but she clearly doesn't feel that they are appropriate -
and I accept her judgment. I'm sure that Monica has made sure that Conan is
receiving excellent care.

How? Kennel Care? No cage is good. Isn't this the truth?

I never like to think of a cat spending time in a
kennel, but it is far better to spend a little extra time now to make sure
he will eventually be adopted by someone who will love him and give him the
best of care for his entire life than to accept a home simply to "get him
out of there quickly."

Fair enough, but the real problem is that Monica herself conceeds that
she could not have gotten Conan without the group. This whole story is
an inverted "Little Red Hen". Everyone helped SOW, but now only one
gets the joy and pleasure of finding Conan a home? This is selfish.
She's soaking up all the fun for herself.

Conan is a young cat, and a relatively short time in
a kennel or boarding situation is a drop in the bucket out of a cat's
lifetime. It would be tragic if things were rushed and Conan were adopted by
the wrong people and then either neglected or returned once again - as has
already happened to him once. As a former board member of the Humane
Society, I completely agree with the way Monica is handling things and would
do things no differently. One of my tasks when I served on the board of
directors was to conduct follow-up investigations of homes where cats and
dogs had been adopted. I was appalled by some of the circumstances I saw.
These were people who had been screened by the animal shelter, but they made
some grievous errors in releasing these helpless animals without doing
adequate background investigations. This is a situation that Monica
obviously hopes to avoid!

What if the sky WAS falling! Come'on, only freaks live their lives like
this.
You could get mugged just going to the local 7-11, or hit by a truck.

Deep down you know she is not right in this, deep down, here, you are
trying to expel guilt.

I read the rest of your post, but I've said plenty.

Vilifying someone who clearly has Conan's best interest at heart is
something I simply don't understand. I'm glad that Monica's group is now
looking out for Conan's welfare. This has become a petty flame war, and
Monica is wise not to let herself become embroiled in answering every
question that someone on this group raises. I have stayed pretty much out of
the controversy and have posted only a very limited number of messages
because I have been so disgusted at the low levels to which the dialog has
sunk, but this has gone on for so long that I think it is important for
someone to point out the good work that Monica is doing and to let her know
that she has supporters on the newsgroup. I am one of them!

MaryL

"MaryL" -OUT-THE-LITTER wrote in message
news:ThFAe.113936$yV4.97240@okepread03...


I do not for one moment believe the negative spin that some people on this
NG have cast on her role in the Conan saga. As far as I recall, Monica
became involved only after Mary posted that she could not save this cat.

Nonsense. I have an email from Monica dated the night prior to this.
Moreover, when she contacted Dan Mahoney, the man who promised me
(Rhonda, Tracy, and Charlie, too, in group emails) that he would pick Conan
/Dylan up first thing the next morning to take him to the kennel until he
could
drive him to San Diego the next day, do you imagine that he said nothing
about
the plan? Bull****.


The
cat has now been rescued from the OC shelter and is in no danger of
euthanasia. If you have read the lengthy email messages that were posted,
you might notice that the original group first talked about saving Conan
from OC, and they were willing at that time to board him while they looked
for a home. Why are people now rushing to get him into a home - one that
might be inadequate - when he is obviously safe and is being
well-cared-for? It is better to take the time to select a good home than
to "rush to judgment." I haven't seen the correspondence between Monica
and the homes that were offered, but she clearly doesn't feel that they
are appropriate - and I accept her judgment.

Therein lies the rub. Those of us who have seen the emails know that this
cat is merely a pawn in the "Make Monica Look like the Best Cat Placer
Ever" game.

There is a reason many of us are upset. Believe what you like--though you
admittedly have less information than those of us who are upset about the
cruel treatment this cat has received.

There is not much I can do, but I tend to be resourceful so the parties
involved may rest assured that I will do everything I can to see that this
intolerable, cruel, and abusive situation is resolved as soon as possible.
Happily, the identities of the parties involved are a matter of public
record.

Dan Mahoney, his wife Nancy Mahoney, and Monica Towles will be held
responsible for what happens to this cat.

MaryL wrote:
I have been following some of the messages concerning Monica with a
combination of sadness and anger. Monica has a long history on the
newsgroup, and many of you should be well aware that a cat's best interest
is always foremost on her mind. You can tell a lot about a person by that
person's posting history, and Monica has always shown an uncompromising
dedication to the welfare of cats - all cats, not just her own. She has been
consistent in her posting and her high values.

Mary, I've said things in support of Monica and I've said things in
support of Mary and her group. Neither "faction" is evil. Dan,
however, was duplicitous and betrayed Mary, then lied to her, and then
avoided her. I also said things in support of Dan because I've read
his posts for awhile now, too, and he seems very nice. However,
personally, I think he was clearly wrong in this situation (people can
think others are wrong without declaring war on them). I realize
neither you nor Monica wish to address this as you feel prior
relationships are not Monica's concern. I even agree that may be true.
But a great deal of the negative stuff going on here is because of
what Dan did rather than what Monica did/is doing.

I also have to say that, although I don't know the specific reasons why
Greg in SD and Meghan's sister were denied, it does seem a shame to
have Conan/Dylan still sitting in a cage. I realize Monica wants to be
very careful and Conan should have a forever home but how well can
Monica control that from Canada? She is not going to be able to meet
the prospective adopters face to face nor see their homes. How well
can one get to know someone through emails and the telephone? It
sounds as though Dan is who is going to have to make the ultimate
decision. Monica can screen who she thinks is appropriate but then
what? They just go pick Conan up from the kennel and no one meets them
face to face or does Dan meet them face to face and, if so, is he
qualified to make the ultimate decision? Neither sounds like too
wonderful of a screening process. After all, Dan has 6 cats and has
had financial troubles of late. I doubt if Monica would find him a
satisfactory adopter and yet he gets to decide if someone else is?

And it seems as though now newspaper ads are being run to find
Conan/Dylan a home. Is that a good way to find a quality adopter? The
ad said an adoption fee would be charged but that means nothing.
Crappy shelters charge adoption fees, too, and scummy people pay them
willingly and still abandon the cat later. Charging an adoption fee
and screening someone on the phone is not going to guarantee Conan a
good home. I think people are getting worried that someone is paying
the boarding for him but that can't continue for months/years and
eventually standards may be loosened and someone who isn't a good
adopter will start to sound pretty good. Anyone can lie about their
house, their other pets, their history, their job, their financial
situation. I certainly think Monica cares about cats and I have
enjoyed her posts for years but she is a loooooong way away from Conan
and that's not a very good position to be in to make an accurate
assessment of a potential adopter.

That's what has people concerned, people who have cared about Conan
prior to Monica's involvement with him (oh, and Dan's duplicity, of
course).

Candace

In news:ThFAe.113936$yV4.97240@okepread03,
-OUT-THE-LITTERMaryL stated
unanimously:
I have been following some of the messages concerning Monica
with a
combination of sadness and anger. Monica has a long history on
the
newsgroup, and many of you should be well aware that a cat's
best interest
is always foremost on her mind. You can tell a lot about a
person by that
person's posting history, and Monica has always shown an
uncompromising
dedication to the welfare of cats - all cats, not just her own.
She has
been consistent in her posting and her high values.

I do not for one moment believe the negative spin that some
people on this
NG have cast on her role in the Conan saga. As far as I recall,
Monica
became involved only after Mary posted that she could not save
this cat.
The cat has now been rescued from the OC shelter and is in no
danger of
euthanasia. If you have read the lengthy email messages that
were posted,
you might notice that the original group first talked about
saving Conan
from OC, and they were willing at that time to board him while
they looked
for a home. Why are people now rushing to get him into a home -
one that
might be inadequate - when he is obviously safe and is being
well-cared-for? It is better to take the time to select a good
home than
to "rush to judgment." I haven't seen the correspondence
between Monica
and the homes that were offered, but she clearly doesn't feel
that they
are appropriate - and I accept her judgment. I'm sure that
Monica has
made sure that Conan is receiving excellent care. I never like
to think
of a cat spending time in a kennel, but it is far better to
spend a
little extra time now to make sure he will eventually be
adopted by
someone who will love him and give him the best of care for his
entire
life than to accept a home simply to "get him out of there
quickly."
Conan is a young cat, and a relatively short time in a kennel
or boarding
situation is a drop in the bucket out of a cat's lifetime. It
would be
tragic if things were rushed and Conan were adopted by the
wrong people
and then either neglected or returned once again - as has
already
happened to him once. As a former board member of the Humane
Society, I
completely agree with the way Monica is handling things and
would do
things no differently. One of my tasks when I served on the
board of
directors was to conduct follow-up investigations of homes
where cats and
dogs had been adopted. I was appalled by some of the
circumstances I saw.
These were people who had been screened by the animal shelter,
but they
made some grievous errors in releasing these helpless animals
without
doing adequate background investigations. This is a situation
that Monica
obviously hopes to avoid!
Vilifying someone who clearly has Conan's best interest at
heart is
something I simply don't understand. I'm glad that Monica's
group is now
looking out for Conan's welfare. This has become a petty flame
war, and
Monica is wise not to let herself become embroiled in answering
every
question that someone on this group raises. I have stayed
pretty much out
of the controversy and have posted only a very limited number
of messages
because I have been so disgusted at the low levels to which the
dialog has
sunk, but this has gone on for so long that I think it is
important for
someone to point out the good work that Monica is doing and to
let her
know that she has supporters on the newsgroup. I am one of
them!

MaryL

This has been a petty flame war for a MONTH.

"Mary" wrote
There is not much I can do, but I tend to be resourceful so the parties
involved may rest assured that I will do everything I can to see that this
intolerable, cruel, and abusive situation is resolved as soon as possible.
Happily, the identities of the parties involved are a matter of public
record.

I think you are going a bit far here, charging Monica & Co. with being
"intolerable, cruel, and abusive". That's pretty strong language. At
worst, you believe Conan is being housed in a kennel. That might not be the
ideal situation, but it is certainly not animal abuse.

--
-Kelly

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:46:32 -0500, "MaryL"
-OUT-THE-LITTER wrote:


I have been following some of the messages concerning Monica with a
combination of sadness and anger.

That's too bad, Mary. I have been reading them with a combination of
amusement and hearty satisfaction.

Monica has a long history on the
newsgroup, and many of you should be well aware that a cat's best interest
is always foremost on her mind.

Bah. Anyone can say that. Actions speak louder than words. I can't
see that Monica has done anything positive for this cat. He'd be in a
fine home now if not for her.

You can tell a lot about a person by that
person's posting history, and Monica has always shown an uncompromising
dedication to the welfare of cats - all cats, not just her own. She has been
consistent in her posting and her high values.

She spews high-minded rhetoric. So what? Lot's of weak-minded people
say the right things on Usenet, because they need validation from
their peers.

[snip]

Vilifying someone who clearly has Conan's best interest at heart is
something I simply don't understand.

Monica's supporters were quick to vilify me. I can take it. But
guess what? I can also dish it out.

I'm glad that Monica's group is now
looking out for Conan's welfare. This has become a petty flame war, and
Monica is wise not to let herself become embroiled in answering every
question that someone on this group raises.

This is especially true if the answers are what everyone thinks they
are.

Charlie

Thank you, Candace. That was a well-stated post. My feelings exactly
and you said it very well.

-T

"KellyH" wrote in message
...
"Mary" wrote
There is not much I can do, but I tend to be resourceful so the parties
involved may rest assured that I will do everything I can to see that
this
intolerable, cruel, and abusive situation is resolved as soon as
possible.
Happily, the identities of the parties involved are a matter of public
record.

I think you are going a bit far here, charging Monica & Co. with being
"intolerable, cruel, and abusive". That's pretty strong language. At
worst, you believe Conan is being housed in a kennel. That might not be
the ideal situation, but it is certainly not animal abuse.


Considering his past, and the fact that he would have been in a lovely home
with
a wonderful human had Monica done the right thing, it is indeed animal
abuse that he sits in a cage now two weeks after Dan got him from the
shelter.

You see too many cats, Kelly. The individuals begin to not matter any more
after a while. This particular cat matters to me.

Philip wrote:

This has been a petty flame war for a MONTH.

And in that time you have become quite the flame-master.
Congrats?