Are pets covered under the no family rule?

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Gracie

 

[Gracie]

I'd explain the circumstance, but you are too dense and hateful to understand. Plus, you don't like animals so why bother.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I'd explain the circumstance, but you are too dense and hateful to understand. Plus, you don't like animals so why bother.

I don't like animals? Where do you get that from? Never mind, it's irrelevant.

I asked a question about the rules Doesn't matter if I like animals or not, you claimed that a moderator said that the no family rule applies to pets, I'm asking for a clarification.

 

[Gracie]

I'd explain the circumstance, but you are too dense and hateful to understand. Plus, you don't like animals so why bother.

I don't like animals? Where do you get that from? Never mind, it's irrelevant.

I asked a question about the rules Doesn't matter if I like animals or not, you claimed that a moderator said that the no family rule applies to pets, I'm asking for a clarification.

Asking questions means you are melting down. That's what you said when I asked questions, right?
Pets are family. Especially ones that died and someone shares their grief. Go after my pets or anyone elses, it's FAMILY.

 

[Sherry]

If it's not covered in the rules, and someone chooses to attack a poster's pet, then that would just reflect on the person hitting below the belt, imo.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

If it's not covered in the rules, and someone chooses to attack a poster's pet, then that would just reflect on the person hitting below the belt, imo.

I don't disagree with you Sherry. My quarrel is strictly with the idea that pets are covered under the no family rule as Gracie claimed.

 

[westwall]

There have been times when we have invoked the family rule with certain posters.

 

[Gracie]

If it's not covered in the rules, and someone chooses to attack a poster's pet, then that would just reflect on the person hitting below the belt, imo.

I don't disagree with you Sherry. My quarrel is strictly with the idea that pets are covered under the no family rule as Gracie claimed.

You are too dense and nasty to explain it to.

 

[Sherry]

There is probably a back story to this thread that I'm not aware of...just offering my opinion. I doubt I've ever shared info about any of my pets, but if I did and someone used it against me, I'm too stubborn to let them have the satisfaction of knowing they upset me...I'd just take every opportunity to rip on the fucker.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

There have been times when we have invoked the family rule with certain posters.

I could see that if someone used a dead pet to harass another poster.

But that isn't quite the same thing as pets being off limits too flame.

 

[Gracie]

I could see that if someone used a dead pet to harass another poster.

Ding ding ding.

There are lines that should not be crossed. If those lines are crossed, shit happens.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I could see that if someone used a dead pet to harass another poster.

Ding ding ding.

There are lines that should not be crossed. If those lines are crossed, shit happens.

But that doesn't mean pets are covered under no family.

I mean if I called your dog a homosexual retard, would that be against the rules? Nope.

 

[Gracie]

I could see that if someone used a dead pet to harass another poster.

Ding ding ding.

There are lines that should not be crossed. If those lines are crossed, shit happens.

But that doesn't mean pets are covered under no family.

I mean if I called your dog a homosexual retard, would that be against the rules? Nope.

That comment is NOT PERSONAL. Using a dead pet IS PERSONAL.

 

[April]

There have been times when we have invoked the family rule with certain posters.

Yup.

There are lines that have been crossed in regard to a family pet and action has been taken...pets are family members in my book and should be treated as such.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

I could see that if someone used a dead pet to harass another poster.

Ding ding ding.

There are lines that should not be crossed. If those lines are crossed, shit happens.

But that doesn't mean pets are covered under no family.

I mean if I called your dog a homosexual retard, would that be against the rules? Nope.

That comment is NOT PERSONAL. Using a dead pet IS PERSONAL.

Exactly, which means pets are not covered the same way family is.If I told you your child was a retard, that would be a violation. If I tell you your dog is, that's no violation.

 

[Gracie]

I could see that if someone used a dead pet to harass another poster.

Ding ding ding.

There are lines that should not be crossed. If those lines are crossed, shit happens.

But that doesn't mean pets are covered under no family.

I mean if I called your dog a homosexual retard, would that be against the rules? Nope.

That comment is NOT PERSONAL. Using a dead pet IS PERSONAL.

Exactly, which means pets are not covered the same way family is.If I told you your child was a retard, that would be a violation. If I tell you your dog is, that's no violation.

Again...you are too dense to "get it".
You can whine all you want and hope for staff to come 'splain to you, but don't hold yer breath. You are not worthy for that 'splanation.

 

[Wolfsister77]

pets are family members in my book and should be treated as such.

+1

 

[mamooth]

My kitty gets abuse here all the time.

Whatevs. That's why I put him there, to draw out bad behavior from the kooks. If I was thin-skinned, I wouldn't be here.