Forum rule violations and legal issues in the Pets subforum

Look, guys,
I’m jumping in here because I need to call out the constant rule-breaking happening right under our noses. Specifically, the moderators in the Pets subforum are basically running a free pass for smuggling and shady advertising.
In several different threads, owners and employees from various dog training academies are straight-up recruiting new clients. They’re hiding behind these official-looking notices claiming that the mods actually tolerate—and even suggest—that users with issues reach out to these specific instructors. Is this because they’re buddies? Or is there some kickback money involved? Honestly, I don't care, but if management isn't aware of this blatant favoritism, then this is exactly where it needs to be flagged.
On top of that, there’s literal black-market pet food sales going on in certain threads, and the mods are just letting it slide. It’s pretty funny how the same names keep popping up in both the training ads and the illegal sales. Coincidence? Maybe. Or maybe not. Who knows.

If the whole policy of this site is to let this kind of stuff fly, then just ignore this post. But personally, I doubt the FBI would be nearly as chill about unauthorized black-market sales.
Later,

Could you maybe dive a little deeper into this and back it up with some links, if you don't mind?

Look, in this specific thread, people who actually run pet training schools are straight-up advertising their services, and you can see all the links to their businesses right there in their signatures. So, after I called them out for breaking the forum rules, my damn post gets nuked. Then, over in another thread about dog training, one of the moderators is basically funneling people with questions toward a specific member via private message because she works at that exact same school! And when someone brings up a different school or training method that doesn't match the "official" ads, she just starts belittling and trashing them. Total bias.

In this thread, whenever anyone asks about dog food, users are constantly being told to hit up other members through private messages to buy food at "discounted" prices. If you just glance through the posts, it’s incredibly obvious that these people are contacting folks who work in the pet food industry or used to sell it themselves. The moderators are all over this thread and they definitely know the black market sales are happening right under their noses using these topics. I even tried to warn them about the illegal selling happening right in the thread, too.

Let me get this straight right off the bat: the reason I'm filing this report is because of the blatant hypocrisy. They are targeting a group of people who don't agree with them and trying to force some new rule on us by hiding behind the Law. It’s ridiculous. Even though I think they’re just making up whatever they want regarding rules about photos of purchased dogs—which has absolutely zero basis in actual Law—the moderators themselves claimed they wouldn't be accomplices to anyone breaking the rules or the Law. So, here I am, pointing out the massive irregularities in how this sub-forum is being run while they just turn a blind eye to certain people and constantly go after everyone else.

rustydrifter10 said:Could you please elaborate on this and provide some links to back it up?

I’m not sure what needs explaining or "backing up" here. This is just a blatant case of people ignoring the forum rules whenever it suits them—or whenever there's something in it for them. It should be obvious to everyone on this board. ☕

I expect a detailed response and a full explanation regarding steelorca2's post. 🙂

Please bear with me here, because there is a whole lot to get through. 🙂

The black and white duo is waiting on a detailed response 🙂

I figured I’d weigh in on this too.
Since the admin rustydrifter10 decided to enforce a rule banning photos of docked dogs—even though docking itself isn't illegal under American Law, and certainly doesn't make posting a picture a crime
The reasoning used here lacks even a shred of common sense; by citing the ban on docking, the moderators are claiming that showing a photo is inherently promoting the practice, despite the fact that nobody here has actually advocated for it.
It feels like a targeted move against owners of these dogs, and honestly, it ignores the dogs themselves, though they don't get a say in things like neutering either, but I won't linger on that point for too long.
I’m just a volunteer who loves dogs, and I am a staunch opponent of docking or any kind of unnecessary mutilation, which is exactly why I see absolutely nothing wrong with posting photos of docked dogs, because

-there is no way for anyone to know, nor is an owner obligated to disclose, if a dog was brought into the US from a country where docking is legal, or if they were simply rescued.

On one hand, they cite the Law, yet on the other, they are essentially creating their own private Law on this forum while ignoring actual violations that steelorca2 has pointed out.
I'm sure the admin rustydrifter10 knows exactly what I'm getting at, so rather than starting a whole new thread, I’ll just keep my comments right here in this existing discussion.

As far as I understand, discrimination is prohibited in all its forms, and this forum policy discriminates against certain owners by denying them equal rights within this community.
Furthermore, it really undermines the credibility of the moderation team when they insist on imposing personal opinions as universal rules.

p.s. I might suggest a speed-reading course; apparently they aren't expensive and they can be quite helpful.

rustydrifter10 said:Bear with me here because there is quite a bit to get through. 🙂

It’s certainly not the Encyclopædia Britannica...☕

Got it, thanks for the heads-up 🙂

Honestly, I just don't get why everyone is making such a massive deal out of people giving each other tips so someone might happen to make a little extra cash! It’s really not that deep, and frankly, I don't see what the big problem is here since there isn't even any direct advertising going on in what I read. If you start banning this kind of thing, you might as well ban every single suggestion ever made about anything, because if you follow that logic, even recommending a doctor would be off-limits just because that physician might end up earning some money from a new patient! I am completely baffled by this whole thread, and I just had to jump in and say that what you guys are doing right now is honestly a pretty terrible move.

silverviper3 said:People snitching on each other just to line their own pockets—I don't see what the big deal is. I read through it, and there isn't any direct advertising going on. If you start banning this, you might as well ban every single suggestion made here. Even mentioning a doctor could be an issue if they end up gaining a patient from a recommendation. I honestly don't get why this is even a discussion, and frankly, I think what you're doing here is pretty lousy.

You might want to try reading this thread from the very beginning.

silverviper3 said:I don't get why everyone is making such a big deal out of people looking out for one another just to make a quick buck; I read through it and there isn't any blatant advertising going on, so if you want to ban this, you might as well ban any kind of recommendation, even for a doctor, since suggesting a physician could technically lead to them gaining a patient, and frankly, I find this whole thread and the way you guys are handling it to be pretty pathetic.

is advertising
extremely clearly
and if you can't see that then you might want to work on your reading comprehension...give it another read, they say that helps.

Man, this rule is such a drag.
There’s way too much back-and-forth about it 😬
It's impossible to actually make a call 😁

Look, this is a forum, which means people come here specifically to find information, so I honestly don't see what you mean by "advertising"—I just see one person helping another because they actually know what might work for them! I can't tell you how many times I've been stuck and felt incredibly relieved when someone finally pointed me in the right direction, so really, why does it matter so much to you? It’s definitely not an ad; nobody jumped in here saying, "Hey, check out this website where you can get this and that," instead, someone simply gave a thoughtful response intended to actually answer the question properly.

Are we seriously going to suffocate this community until we aren't allowed to say anything at all? People just love sticking their noses into business that isn't theirs, and the absolute worst ones are those who act like they're unpaid moderators.

Just take a look at this ridiculous post from the guy who started the thread.

"To whom it may concern,
I would like to take this opportunity to formally alert you to the continuous violation of forum rules and the approval of smuggling and advertising within the Pets subforum by the moderator in charge."

I mean, give me a break! He sounds like he’s drafting an official letter to the President of the United States.
As far as I'm concerned, no rules were broken, and even if they were, why on earth should I care? Did anyone insult me? Or did anyone insult you? No, this is nothing more than pure spite and jealousy.

Daniel Ward87

Is the internet actually working where you guys are, or are we all just communicating via carrier pigeon at this point? 😲

Look, here’s the deal—even if puppy mill breeding isn't technically illegal under current Law, we still won't allow anyone promoting it on KLJ. It's the same exact thing with ear cropping. Even though just owning a dog with cropped ears isn't against the rules (which sucks, honestly), we aren't about to tolerate animal abuse or mutilating pets just for some aesthetic look.

Look, here’s the deal: your personal take on dog docking is a complete and total tangent. It’s totally off-topic because it doesn't even touch the actual points I brought up in my complaint.

Promoting breeding on KLJ is strictly against the rules.
But hey, posting pictures of those same dogs isn't banned, even though you see them all over KLJ.
Now, posting photos of docked dogs is a big no-no.

Wait, how does it work that posting pics of docked dogs counts as promotion, but sharing photos of dogs from breeding kennels or feral populations doesn't? Makes zero sense!🤷

steelorca2 said:The thing is, your personal feelings regarding dog docking are completely off-topic since they don't actually address any of the specific points I raised in my complaint.

I was honestly hoping to hold off on chiming in here until we heard back from the admin team, but since I can't help myself, I’ll just briefly touch upon the "questions I raised in my complaint" portion of your message. In response to Nixon, you included two different links, which—if you'll forgive my professional habit of translating things into plain English—basically amounts to an accusation that the moderators over at KLJ are taking bribes to allow blatant advertising for training classes and dog food.

If I may, I’d like to gently point out how unfounded those accusations are against us. On the thread How to find common ground with your dog - schools, centers, lectures [general topic], announcements are made for every single school, course, and lecture, regardless of who is running them. We actually laid out this exact policy way back in this post, which was written in March of this year. So, I have to wonder why there wasn't any pushback then? And if anyone needs proof that all sorts of different trainers and courses are indeed represented, I'll use a smaller font just to make this easier to scan through:

4, 5, 16, 28, 42, 44, 49, 66, 105, 144, 147, 148, 159, 160, 161, 163, 172, 177, 180, 181, 182.

That same unfairness applies to your second link as well, which simply points to posts from the first forty and last forty pages of the discussion.I've been spending quite a bit of time lately researching all the different options out there for dog food, and honestly, it feels like a full-time job just trying to figure out what's actually good for our furry little companions.I’ve noticed that some of our members have been posting quite a few suggestions regarding specific locations or individuals where one might pick up dog food, so I think it would be a lovely idea to perhaps switch to a smaller font for those particular threads.

1-40: 105, 134, 184, 279, It looks like we’ve officially crossed that threshold from 339 to 340, and honestly, I find myself feeling a little sentimental about the transition!, 418, 423, 455, 466, 470, 518, 691, 704, 706, 766 i 261-303: 5201, 5204,
5228, 5247, 5249, 5304, 5308, 5334, 5340, 5369, 5376, 5428, 5636, 5653, 5656, 5719, 5728, 5868.

Smartie, I truly feel like you’ve made yourself a bit of a target here, though I can certainly see why some might find you a thorn in their side for reasons beyond just your disagreements over dog training—which, granted, is entirely your prerogative—but your recent behavior seems a little disproportionate. You’ve been quite vocal about how certain types of pet food can be sourced through her, and since those specific brands were only just hitting the shelves in the States when those posts went up, we all decided to let them slide. It’s funny, really, because we never felt the need to step in when Pimpinell or Mash were pointing people toward specific suppliers, nor can I recall you ever flagging those instances, much like how we never banned anyone simply for recommending a local pet boutique.

In your second post on this thread, you actually laid out exactly what prompted this complaint quite clearly:

steelorca2 said:Let me be perfectly clear right from the start—the reason I’m filing this report is because of this hypocritical targeting of a specific group of people with differing opinions on the forum, all while hiding behind new rules disguised as legal mandates. While I personally feel that the way the rules regarding photos of docked dogs are being interpreted is totally arbitrary and lacks any actual basis in the law, the moderators have made it known they won't act as accomplices to breaking the law. So, I'm essentially pointing out the inconsistencies in how certain subforums are handled, where some areas are constantly under scrutiny while others are completely ignored.

It seems to me, however, that you are interpreting the situation through a rather subjective lens. Could you please provide a link to a post that proves this is actually an attempt to target a specific group of dissenters? The law isn't a smokescreen; it’s a real statute that prohibits docking tails and ears except in very specific circumstances, though I suppose most people here aren't particularly interested in debating legal minutiae. Unfortunately, we can't control the judges or the individuals—be they owners or vets—who either ignore the law entirely or actively break it, but we can choose not to participate by simply not allowing photos of, say, freshly docked puppies, or by asking that when photographing older pets (those docked under previous laws), it isn't the focal point of the image.

Furthermore, the American Kennel Club has already announced that moving forward, showing docked dogs at AKC-sanctioned events will be prohibited if they were docked after January 1, 2013. Perhaps our reaction was a bit premature? Maybe so. But it is also true that we are trying to raise awareness among owners of household pets (and I really want to emphasize the word "pets"), hoping that a change in public consciousness might eventually lead to a change in the law. If being wrong means accepting animal suffering, then thank you, but no thanks—none of us have anything left to prove here at KLJ. But if advocating for pet welfare and refusing to promote their mistreatment—even if that just means not posting photos—is acceptable, then there are likely plenty of other forums where owners can brag about, to put it bluntly, having their puppies' ears docked.

slybison88 said:Promoting puppy mills is banned on KLJ.
But posting photos of them isn't banned, yet there are plenty of them on KLJ.
And posting photos of docked dogs is forbidden.

How is it that posting photos of docked dogs counts as promotion, but posting photos of dogs from mills or feral populations doesn't? 🤷

Could you kindly provide a link confirming that, along with a reminder of when you last reported such a post? If your point is actually directed toward dogs found on the street or rescued from shelters who ended up there because of puppy mills, then I honestly wouldn't even know how to respond to that.
😢