What Price For Kitty?

equalizer wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:36:29 -0700, "Monique Y. Mudama"
wrote:

On 2005-02-15, Mary penned:

Lynnie is talking about the sickly saccharine rec.pets.cats.anecdotes,
only
surpassed in its creepy party-line sweetness by the very icky
rec.pets.cats.community where they post in baby tale. *Gag* That is
about
her speed, as she can dish it out but she just can't take it.

God forbid there be one place on the net where civility is encouraged.


Your "shangri la" is easily attainable with all this new-fangled
technology. Just start a moderated newsgroup or web BBS, be the
moderator, get people to post there, and live by your own laws.

eq

There's always "Yahoo Groups," too. I cannot help but wonder, when
there are so many moderated groups, why the bellyacher censor wannabes
waste their time and our time with all this "how everyone should be posting"
horse ****.Go where you can be happy. I can be happy where everyone gets
to say exactly what they want to say. Throw it all into the mix and see what
happens, I say. And perhaps take yourself and your notion of "propriety"
a bit less seriously. Life is short.

"-L." wrote in message
ups.com...
It's a question of practicality. Nobody has unlimited resources. Even
the richest can lose everything. When you have nothing, how are you
supposed to care for yourself, let alone an animal? Sure, you can say
"I will never be in that situation" but the truth is, you don't know -
no one does.



I took the OP's question to be, "hey, what's everyone's limit? Is it $500?,
$1000?, $10,000?" My answer is that it all depends on the situation. What
is the overall health of the cat? What is the diagnosis/prognosis? Of what
benefit is this hypothetical procedure? I can't say "I would never spend
more than X amount on vet care for my cat". It all depends on the above
factors.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

"Monique Y. Mudama" wrote in message
...
And whether or not they're rich is really irrelevant, imo. I have a
real problem with anyone who tells anyone else how to spend their money
and time, or castigates them for not spending money and time on the
right things. Is it fair that some people make millions of dollars for
lip-synching catchy lyrics while others barely make subsistance to teach
inner-city kids? Well, no. But that still doesn't mean it's anyone's
business how either of them spend their resources.

I think we're all painfully aware that there are more needs in the world
than
any one of us, or possibly even all of us, can address. We have poverty,
starvation, animal and child cruelty, and horrific natural disasters --
and
that's just in the US! The same is going on, often on a much greater
scale,
in other countries around the world, plus war, oppression, genocide ...
people
who think contraception is evil ... and then there are more subtle causes,
like civil liberty and the right to free speech ...

We all have to draw our lines. I'm not Mother Theresa, and I'm not going
to
sacrifice all of my worldly possessions to help everyone else. I'm just
not
that generous. I try to do what is right; I give money to the causes I
can, I
donate what I can, I freecycle so that my stuff doesn't end up in a
landfill.
And where I choose to draw that line is entirely up to me.

Excellent points, Monique.
--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

On 2005-02-15, equalizer penned:
On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:36:29 -0700, "Monique Y. Mudama"
wrote:

On 2005-02-15, Mary penned:

Lynnie is talking about the sickly saccharine rec.pets.cats.anecdotes,
only surpassed in its creepy party-line sweetness by the very icky
rec.pets.cats.community where they post in baby tale. *Gag* That is about
her speed, as she can dish it out but she just can't take it.

God forbid there be one place on the net where civility is encouraged.


Your "shangri la" is easily attainable with all this new-fangled technology.
Just start a moderated newsgroup or web BBS, be the moderator, get people to
post there, and live by your own laws.

eq

Perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension skills. The NG being
discussed *already exists*. Apparently, though, just the existence of a
friendly NG threatens certain people, like you, so much that you have to get
nasty.

Me, I much prefer open forums to anything moderated, because so often
moderators try to enforce agendas and give special treatment to their friends.
I have to admit, though, that the unmoderated alpine skiing NG is so painfully
bloated with flamewars that I much prefer the moderated version, and I
unsubscribed from a motorcycle NG because it was filled with trolls and people
cross-posting racist crap.

I really don't think H&B is nearly as bad as some people seem to think.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2005-02-15, Mary penned:

There's always "Yahoo Groups," too. I cannot help but wonder, when there are
so many moderated groups, why the bellyacher censor wannabes waste their
time and our time with all this "how everyone should be posting" horse
****.Go where you can be happy. I can be happy where everyone gets to say
exactly what they want to say. Throw it all into the mix and see what
happens, I say. And perhaps take yourself and your notion of "propriety" a
bit less seriously. Life is short.

Stop being intellectually lazy. You very well know the difference
between censorship and a statement of preference, and yet you persist in
claiming that a statement akin to "I like people to have civil
discussions" somehow equates to censorship.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

"Monique Y. Mudama" wrote in message
...
On 2005-02-15, Mary penned:

There's always "Yahoo Groups," too. I cannot help but wonder, when there
are
so many moderated groups, why the bellyacher censor wannabes waste their
time and our time with all this "how everyone should be posting" horse
****.Go where you can be happy. I can be happy where everyone gets to
say
exactly what they want to say. Throw it all into the mix and see what
happens, I say. And perhaps take yourself and your notion of "propriety"
a
bit less seriously. Life is short.

Stop being intellectually lazy. You very well know the difference
between censorship and a statement of preference, and yet you persist in
claiming that a statement akin to "I like people to have civil
discussions" somehow equates to censorship.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

C-O-P O-U-T. These people want to fight. And that's fine. It isn't even as
though I can't appreciate their input. I just think of them as the "I'll die
with my gun" types.

"Karen" wrote in message
...
C-O-P O-U-T. These people want to fight. And that's fine. It isn't even as
though I can't appreciate their input. I just think of them as the "I'll
die
with my gun" types.


I don't "like to fight" but I do like to discuss and get different opinions.
What annoys me is when a thread is getting OT or heated, and others start a
thread begging people to stop. I'm of the "if you don't like it, ignore it"
mindset. I think discussions can be passionate and civil at the same time.

--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

"Monique Y. Mudama" wrote in message
...

Perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension skills. The NG
being
discussed *already exists*. Apparently, though, just the existence of a
friendly NG threatens certain people, like you, so much that you have to
get
nasty.


Both rpch+b and rpca have their place. Sometimes I do want to tell a cute
story about my cat and not have a bunch of "OMG, you feed your cat dry
food?" comments. Other times, I do need an answer to a behavioral/medical
question, so I post here. A ng is what the posters make it.


--
-Kelly
kelly at farringtons dot net
"Wake up, and smell the cat food" -TMBG

"KellyH" wrote in message
...
"Karen" wrote in message
...
C-O-P O-U-T. These people want to fight. And that's fine. It isn't even
as
though I can't appreciate their input. I just think of them as the "I'll
die
with my gun" types.


I don't "like to fight" but I do like to discuss and get different
opinions.
What annoys me is when a thread is getting OT or heated, and others start
a
thread begging people to stop. I'm of the "if you don't like it, ignore
it"
mindset. I think discussions can be passionate and civil at the same
time.

No, I mean the people that think it is "netcopping" to ask them to be civil
even in arguments. It's their "copout" to call that being a net control
freak.

"Monique Y. Mudama" wrote in message
...
On 2005-02-15, Mary penned:

There's always "Yahoo Groups," too. I cannot help but wonder, when there
are
so many moderated groups, why the bellyacher censor wannabes waste their
time and our time with all this "how everyone should be posting" horse
****.Go where you can be happy. I can be happy where everyone gets to
say
exactly what they want to say. Throw it all into the mix and see what
happens, I say. And perhaps take yourself and your notion of "propriety"
a
bit less seriously. Life is short.

Stop being intellectually lazy. You very well know the difference
between censorship and a statement of preference, and yet you persist in
claiming that a statement akin to "I like people to have civil
discussions" somehow equates to censorship.


Did I say I was referring to you? Stop being intellectually sloppy, Mo.