Posts by Jonathan Baker97

Look, I didn't mention that trainers hold certifications and work in coordination with state agencies just to brag; I brought it up to illustrate the fundamental flaw in how you moderate this space. Animal cruelty is strictly defined by law, and the government delegates the enforcement of those standards to organizations, institutions, and individuals who hold specific certificates, credentials, and licenses. It is not your job, nor is it the job of a handful of local users here, to invent a new value system to govern this forum—this isn't your private estate. Therefore, citing certified trainers isn't a deflection; it serves to point out that you are merely enforcing your own personal set of values.

My pet regularly visits both authorized veterinary clinics and certified professional trainers. My pet is neither malnourished (despite occasionally skipping meals for two or three days for training purposes) nor injured (even when he gets rough with me or lunges at another animal, he receives swift, necessary corrections). You have zero evidence that I abuse or mistreat animals, yet you insist on insinuating such things by commenting on the very points I am trying to convey.

Your arrogance isn't limited to attempting to impose your manufactured standards and interpreting complex concepts through the lens of a tiny clique of users; it extends to you declaring, as if it were fact, that the dogs in this specific post are happy and cooperative... that kind of condescension is pure hubris.

I agree that force-free methods are commendable and useful; any method is excellent as long as it works and doesn't harm the pet. However, the way you and a few others promote this as the sole, holistic methodology is actually detrimental to people. My pet was raised using these methods for much of his life. But you are so self-important that you spread the notion that your perspective is the only correct one, despite the widespread application of diverse techniques across the globe. There is no single method that covers every breed, every temperament, and every situation, regardless of how much you try to force that narrative on this forum. Both RCI and balanced training methods are successful, realistic, and respected by professionals; these approaches, which you seem to find abhorrent, are accepted practices used by every successful trainer in the country and align with the standards held by our national institutions. They do not harm the pet in any way, a fact that any veterinarian my pet has seen could confirm.

This site is honestly one of the most pathetic corners of the internet for objective, constructive debate; it functions more like a promotional tool for one specific style of training. You always see the same four or five users positioning themselves as the "official educators" of the community. There is no actual, meaningful discussion here that benefits anyone. If this sub-forum refuses to acknowledge that there are circumstances where it is justified for a human to be bluntly firm with a child, or situations where a disrespectful, aggressive pet needs a physical correction, then this place will always feel less like a service and more like a religious cult dedicated to spreading the dogma of force-free training.

I have no interest in debating who has more experience owning dogs. You truly don't know me, and your arrogance is once again on display as you dismiss me as an amateur, as if we’ve been acquaintances for years.

Just to clarify regarding the shop name I mentioned—the only place in the country that openly sells and advertises the collars I suggested (which you claim are illegal), and which supplies the Department of Homeland Security, the military, and the Coast Guard—the name is literally "My Friend." I wasn't advertising a "friend's shop,"😁 I was naming the business because no other shop exists that carries that specific training tool. It wasn't an ad. And frankly, for someone claiming fifteen years of experience as a dog owner, it's telling that you aren't aware of the only major retailer in the country specializing in professional kennel equipment. This isn't about quantity; it's about quality.😉

Let me say this one last time: I am not here to start wars, to insult anyone, or to promote anything. I almost exclusively show up when someone asks for help to share my experience. I am not here to lecture or to be contrarian. Any sharper posts I have written were directed at users who commented on my posts without being the original authors I was actually trying to assist.

I want to reiterate once again that I am not an advocate for violence or abuse; rather, I support force-free methods—though, granted, not in the dogmatic, evangelical manner you seem to prefer when discussing a pet. However, I simply cannot manage to aggregate enough posts within the pet subforum to provide the full context of my position, a situation for which both you and the moderators are ultimately responsible.

I am requesting that serious attention be paid to the methods and management style currently employed within the pet subforum.

I have been an active participant on this forum for approximately a year now. When I first brought home my German Shepherd puppy, my intention was to find practical, high-quality advice regarding the training and socialization of a young working breed.

Prior to this, I have contributed to the photography section and have generally followed the discussions here—with occasional participation—for perhaps ten years or more.

Yet, within the pet subforum specifically, I have received significantly more reprimands and temporary bans than I have encountered in any other corner of the internet. I joined this specific section intending to share my own expertise in training and socializing German Shepherds. A portion of that experience includes consulting with professional trainers who have worked alongside the Department of Homeland Security and various other federal agencies, specializing in the preparation and training of dogs for professional service. Every one of these professionals holds certifications from the American Kennel Club. Furthermore, I simply wished to pass along the research and information I have gathered online throughout my career.

My comments are almost exclusively directed toward posts made by users who are not regular contributors to these specific discussions, and they almost always pertain to canine training and development. To be precise, I respond to posts where users are soliciting help or seeking suggestions regarding a specific behavioral issue with their pet. I then find myself being reprimanded for responding to the replies of others—specifically when I am addressing the original inquiry. Essentially, someone posts "I have a problem," I offer "this is my suggestion based on experience," and then a small clique of users responds twice: once to the original plea for help, and then a second time to my response—often uninvited and frequently using a derogatory tone.

The group of users I am referring to are permanent fixtures of this subforum and ideological echoes of one another; they frequently use these opportunities to promote their own private training businesses and organizations. For example, you will see comments like, "I'll send you a DM with a recommendation for a trainer."

In and of itself, I understand that such behavior is common on public forums. However, the administrator, Lisa Young83, through the manner in which she issues reprimands and restrictions on free speech and commentary, effectively silences any opposition to the viewpoints held by this particular clique. Consequently, users coming to this forum seeking genuine assistance or information are instead met with filtered content consisting of selective data. In practice, Lisa Young83 functions less as a neutral moderator and more as a curator of information.

To supplement my point, I note there is a thread stating that promoting violence or animal cruelty is strictly prohibited here; however, nowhere in my posts can anything be construed as promoting such things. I am merely discussing my lived experiences. Anyone is free to report me to the relevant authorities—be it neighbors, passersby, or the professional trainers I work with—but that hasn't happened, nor will it, because I practice neither violence nor torture. It is also my opinion that moderators should not be granted the latitude to interpret such heavy terms based on their own personal biases or private lives.

Furthermore, I observe that in other sections, such as the automotive or nutrition forums, individuals who argue that traffic laws are outdated for modern vehicles, or those who openly admit to regularly exceeding speed limits, do not face reprimands or deleted posts. Similarly, vegans who enter the nutrition forum to claim that meat consumption is a crime do not face censorship or disciplinary action.

Given everything stated, when one examines the posts by moderator Lisa Young83, it becomes increasingly difficult to see any semblance of objectivity in her decisions or her approach to managing this subforum, as she appears to be in total alignment with the small group of users who aggressively promote a very specific methodology of dog training.

I have made several attempts in previous posts to state, clearly and unequivocally, that I do not condone violence, nor do I approve of torture or cruelty toward any pet. Despite this, the treatment directed at me and my contributions remains unchanged; the way the pet subforum is being utilized hasn't shifted either, continuing to function more like a privatized platform designed to push a specific personal agenda. This serves as proof that the moderator finds my actual arguments entirely irrelevant, choosing instead to act solely based on their own subjective interpretations. As a long-time user of this American forum, I find this level of quality to be catastrophically low for what is supposed to be an open medium for free communication.

The moderator could just as easily claim I earned warnings or reprimands for promoting tools that aren't legal here in the States. However, the training tools I mentioned are perfectly legal in Germany and many other countries across the globe. Furthermore, I never actually advised anyone to misuse or handle those tools irresponsibly. It’s a ridiculous double standard—it would be like suggesting someone light up a marijuana joint in a discussion about asthma management and then getting banned for allegedly promoting the smuggling, cultivation, or sale of illegal substances. It makes zero sense and serves only to inhibit free and open dialogue. Certain collars may be misused in this country and could arguably be viewed as illegal under local law, yet one could reasonably expect a higher degree of objectivity and enlightenment on this forum. We see it in the automotive sections where traffic laws are debated, or even in health discussions where people openly discuss the benefits of marijuana despite its illegal status.

Man, what kind of substances are you on? What on earth were you thinking...