# SURVEY: New to Hobby - Pay it Forward subforum what do you think?



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Bon has suggested a subforum for new folks to the hobby.

I've gotten feedback from a number of folks privately indicating interest in that. 

Please, please, if you have taken the time to open this, take just one more second and click a voting button. In this case, your votes count and could influence an RTF move.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Sweet! Three votes in favor in about the first 30 seconds. 

Thanks all... 

Please, if you open this, click a voting button.

We may just be launching a subforum sometime....


Chris


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

I voted yes, what I really mean is "yes, but....". The new guys have to be made to feel welcome and comfortable with the main forum as well. I think the subforum is a good idea for the one that is afraid to ask a question that might make him appear in a bad light just by being a beginner. Just be sure they are not made to feel that they must "qualify" in some manner to participate in the main forum. Sometimes the humor and gdg there is worth as much as the training


----------



## Jason Glavich (Apr 10, 2008)

I said yes as well. Would this include a number of FAQ stickys?


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


I agree with your point completely Susan, which is exactly why I've been avoiding a subforum.

I'm just seeking some group opinion.

In my heart-of-hearts, I believe there's a behavioral adjustment needed which tells folks to either ignore newbie posts if they are irritated by the same old-same-old, or try to respond politely.

I'm still not sold on the subforum, but am just wondering what you all think.

Thanks, Chris


----------



## Losthwy (May 3, 2004)

Yes. It should include stickies w/ FAQ, DEFINITIONS, ETC.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


I too thought it was a good idea when I brought it up, but when someone pointed out your exact rationale, I realized it may not work logistically...I too voted NO, because I realized the subforum may work initially but would soon have crickets chirping...

Change for the sake of change is not always good...


----------



## firehouselabs (Jan 23, 2008)

Jason Glavich said:


> I said yes as well. Would this include a number of FAQ stickys?



The problem isn't that the information is not readily available, it is that people do not take the time needed to access the information. This could include using the search feature, reading stickies, or even reading and comprehending the original post. Case in point and a real pet peeve of mine, my latest post looking for a reliable and good repro vet in the Kansas City area. It is a short and to the point post, I clearly stated that while I love Dr. Law and his work, it is just too far of a drive for me for "everyday" tests. Yet looking at the replies, the majority say to use Dr. Law. Now either there are no other reproductive vets on either side of the river of Kansas City, or someone did not read the entire post or comprehend what was written. 
How long is a person a "newbie"? I thought that as long as you are learning (which should be every day) that you are always a "newbie" of something.


----------



## limiman12 (Oct 13, 2007)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


I tired to say X2 but it made me type more


----------



## Vance Ertel (Apr 8, 2009)

I voted "yes" but think that a sticky > sub forum > nothing.


----------



## Tim Carrion (Jan 5, 2003)

Another No. I have never felt that the current forum discouraged questions from newer people and most of the responders have tried to be polite and helpful.

JMO

Tim


----------



## Andy Carlson (Jan 3, 2003)

I voted yes but maybe it should just consist of a bunch of stickies - such as links to frequently brought up by newbies topics - FF, what dvd's for beginners, etc etc., how to search - you get the idea.

It seems to me that the new people are afraid to swim in the deep end of the pool more than it being a matter of them being told they can't go swimming - maybe the sub-forum will help them out til they feel more comfortable taking off the water wings.

I don't want to be sounding like a hard @$$ here - I do have a touch of shyness from time to time so I can understand being a little hesitant to just jump right into the forum but I can honestly say I have never been treated unkindly in all my years here on RTF so I don't quite get all the angst the newbies are feeling.

Back to wondering if spring will ever come regards,;-)

Andy


----------



## jeff t. (Jul 24, 2003)

Andy Carlson said:


> I don't quite get all the angst the newbies are feeling.


Same here Andy

On the other hand, I try to never ask a question without using the RTF search feature or using Google to find the answer for myself. 

No spoon feeding regards


----------



## Lisa S. (May 23, 2003)

I voted yes, and think that the "seat on a duck" thread should be a sticky in that forum so that folks can learn the "humor" of RTF.


----------



## BBnumber1 (Apr 5, 2006)

I voted yes, but like several others, I think it would be best served as aplace to put Stickies of FAQs, and good threads like the Sit means Sit, etc...


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Andy Carlson said:


> I can honestly say I have never been treated unkindly in all my years here on RTF so I don't quite get all the angst the newbies are feeling.
> Andy


Yeah but you've never been dog piled by the RTFettes, well I have.....whew

Someone posts a question about training their bitch in season because she's "moody". Dr. Ed, who has dealt with his fair share of moody bitches replied (to paraphrase myself), just kick her in the butt and tell her to go to work. 

The ensuing firestorm was brutal!


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

I'm with Susan on this one as well.


----------



## Guest (Feb 19, 2011)

BBnumber1 said:


> I voted yes, but like several others, I think it would be best served as aplace to put Stickies of FAQs, and good threads like the Sit means Sit, etc...


I voted yes provided this is the format for the subforum. I agree with Susan that more experienced folks would not take the time to visit subforum to answer questions.


----------



## golden dude (Oct 19, 2009)

I say other.

How about a Sticky with FAQ and "Newbie etiquite"

Along with a little "RTF NICE" when answering a question that may get asked every week. (If you can't be helpfull, move along)

Steve
Have a Golden day!:-D


----------



## Dan Boerboon (May 30, 2009)

Andy Carlson said:


> I voted yes but maybe it should just consist of a bunch of stickies - such as links to frequently brought up by newbies topics - FF, what dvd's for beginners, etc etc., how to search - you get the idea.
> 
> 
> Back to wondering if spring will ever come regards,;-)
> ...


I also voted yes but agree with Andy.


----------



## Leddyman (Nov 27, 2007)

Would the old hands that know their stuff bother to visit the newby forum? Or would it wind up being just us clueless know-it-all's giving questionable advise?


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


Are you kidding??? There's a ton of people that want to answer the newbie questions.. 

Since when is being experienced at anything a pre-requisite for a internet forum???

The "Experienced" are getting pretty darn tired of the mindless questions.

If the "Experienced" want to drop into the sub-forum to offer their help they can.

This place looks more like "Romper Room" If you ask me... *Yikes*

Angie


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2011)

Angie B said:


> The "Experienced" are getting pretty darn tired of the mindless questions.


This is a semantics thing and kind a "same difference" deal, but I think of them as the effortless questions. 

I was thinking about this today and comparing RTF to one of my Golden mailing lists called Work/Gold. That can be an oxymoron at times, but let's save that for another discussion. ;-) The list owner there who literally refers to herself as the czarina comes down on folks who post questions they could have easily have found the answers to themselves.

"Does anyone have Jane Fluffy's email addy?" is due cause for the czarina to step in an publicly state to the list, "If you are looking for someone's contact info, Google is your friend. Once you have exhausted all search capabilities, and only then, may you post an inquiry such as that."

She's tough and we like that about her.  It really does help keep down on the mindless/effortless questions. Having a "Heads Up to New Members of RTF" with the stickies mentioned above would help cut down on some of this stuff.


----------



## dnf777 (Jun 9, 2009)

I voted "no", but *not* because I don't think newbies need a place to ask beginner questions, not just be told to use the search function, or to have to witness battles of the egos amongst disagreeing experts......

*But because most beginner questions generate very useful discussions that we all benefit from hearing. After all, the "basics" are the most important aspects of training.

*It seems like the most experienced and accomplished trainers/handlers here have no problem jumping in and helping to answer newbie's questions. That may not happen as easily on a separate forum.

*With Chris' suggestion about "behavior adjustment" we can all benefit from the useful discussions these folks bring to the table. Even in my surgical practice, I still hold that one of the best ways to stay on top of my game, and constantly be challenged to stay abreast of the latest advancements....is to have medical students and residents as part of the team constantly asking "newbie" questions!


----------



## Troopers Mom (Nov 19, 2005)

I voted NO. I oppose segregation and that is what it will eventually lead to. This is a forum for the retriever community and it should remain strong and whole.

Arleen


----------



## Snicklefritz (Oct 17, 2007)

I voted YES! If a newbie is not satisfied with the answers they get there, there's nothing that prevents them from going to the main forum.

Also, I find it hard to believe that the egos on the main forum could resist offering 'correcting' advice' on the newbie forum when the see really bad advice being dispensed. There seems to be a mind set here that says 'oldies' don't want to help 'newbies' along the way.

The main point in a 'newbies' forum would be a comfort level. A place where somebody new could ask without feeling intimidated.

Go for it!

Snick


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think it would be easier for newbies to find introductory information, if there were a subforum they could access.

The "experienced" people who want to go there, will do so.
The "experienced" people who want nothing to do with it, will not.

Without a subforum, the "experienced" people who want to answer newbie questions will do so.
Without a subforum, the "experienced" people who do not want to answer newbie questions will continue to ignore such questions.

I don't think a subforum will either increase or decrease "experienced" input to newbies.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Snicklefritz said:


> There seems to be a mind set here that says 'oldies' don't want to help 'newbies' along the way.


I disagree


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

Perhaps the "Experienced" should show they have the 'experience' not to open a thread or not respond to a thread if they are so tired of answering those types of questions/threads.


----------



## 7pntail (Jan 20, 2010)

Absolutely, NO! How else could you learn the finer arts of seating a duck? Leave it alone-a nice eclectic mix of dog folks ( some, perhaps not quite in the know as others) and humor. 

Also, which one would I click on? I bet I predate most here on RTF, but If you look at my join date--I am a newbie. How would you delineate who uses the main forum from the sub forum? And, just because I have trained a few dogs that doesn't mean I have a clue. If you make a sub forum I am hangin with the "B team" Might make some of you happy with all my stupid questions! 

Take care all---- John


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Vicky Trainor said:


> Perhaps the "Experienced" should show they have the 'experience' not to open a thread or not respond to a thread if they are so tired of answering those types of questions/threads.


The same might be said for POTUS. But, we have a separate forum, and I, for one, am glad for it.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


Which is why I voted no as well. A sub-fourm won't be much good if the "experienced" posters never visit.



Vicky Trainor said:


> Perhaps the "Experienced" should show they have the 'experience' not to open a thread or not respond to a thread if they are so tired of answering those types of questions/threads.


Amen


----------



## Julie R. (Jan 13, 2003)

Well, I was all set to vote for creation of a newbie forum, but decided to read the thread first. And I'm glad I did, because I agree with the sentiments of others that the help pool might be narrowed, and because I don't think the culture here is bad at all compared to many other BBs.

But I do think it might be well worthwhile making an information page that would include useful stuff for novice trainers as well as those new to this site and/or dog sites in general. Definitely a glossary of terms, maybe alphabetically & in 2 separate categories: dog related terms and abbreviations used by retriever folks and terms and abbreviations unique to RTF or dog boards generally. It could also have stickied "hall of fame" threads like seat on a duck, or Jerry's classic indirect pressure, swishy moderator, etc. and maybe an archives of some of the best responses to questions like FF, stick fetch, FTP, pattern blinds, different testing organizations' rulebooks, etc., the common questions newbies ask about. 

With a readily available resourse we'd then know those that asked the same questions answered on this info. forum were trolls ;-) J/K but lists of FAQs both for training questions as well as bulletin board how-tos like, *the search feature explained!* photo posting, embedding links, using the quote feature, changing the # of posts that appear on a page, ignore feature, etc.

Whatever's decided I agree, it's pretty rare to see truly churlish behavior here (well, occasionally on POTUS ) and most of the pile-ons are just run of the mill cabin fever stuff....hunting season's over, ground's still too snow covered to train, etc.


----------



## Sharon Potter (Feb 29, 2004)

Bottom line is that if a newbie won't do a search in the existing forums before asking questions, they won't do it in a newbie area either.  The same questions will still be asked over and over, just like now.

Also, where is the line drawn as pertains to what constitutes a newbie question?


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

FinnLandR said:


> Especially if the only input the "Experienced" are going to give comes in the form of insults and put-downs. Romper Room/junior high, same thing......


Churlish behavior is not the domain of any particular group.


----------



## Angie B (Sep 30, 2003)

Vicky Trainor said:


> Perhaps the "Experienced" should show they have the 'experience' not to open a thread or not respond to a thread if they are so tired of answering those types of questions/threads.


Nice try Vicky but it doesn't work that way.. Because the title to a thread is not indicative to what the op wants... How would they know??? They don't even understand what they're asking???

If you haven't noticed this place has changed a ton...

This forum needs to be revamped big time.

IMHO...

Angie


----------



## Dick Jennings (Mar 19, 2007)

No. The name of the forum is "Retriever Training Forum". Therefore, it seems logical that the training of retrievers will be discussed here, which includes the asking of training related questions. Nobody is required to read or respond to a specific thread. 

What does make sense is a sticky addressed to new trainers that is "chock full" of links to training program material, threads dealing with specific training issues, and any advice that the "experienced" would like to offer, including posts that recommend research and hard work before posing a question.

I've yet to read a reasonable argument why a subforum is needed.


----------



## DarrinGreene (Feb 8, 2007)

perhaps a forum that is an archive of past, productive threads would be somewhat more useful than a live chat forum Chris.

sit means sit by Ted comes to mind as one that was vey productive and keeps coming up over and over

i'm not sure how many of those there are but a forum where that type of information is readily available might be good to have and avoid the issue of experienced folks shying away

don't site the problem unless you have a proposed solution regards,


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

EdA said:


> Yeah but you've never been dog piled by the RTFettes, well I have.....whew
> 
> Someone posts a question about training their bitch in season because she's "moody". Dr. Ed, who has dealt with his fair share of moody bitches replied (to paraphrase myself), just kick her in the butt and tell her to go to work.
> 
> The ensuing firestorm was brutal!


Oh please........ I heard you loved it!  We should get you a t-shirt:

I've been dog piled by the RTFettes.... with the appropriate picture, of course.... 

What size are you? (T-Shirt, that is).


----------



## Mike Sale (Feb 1, 2011)

I am new myself and i voted yes but after thinking about it , I would like my questions answered by the experienced members here. But i do think the very first thing you see when you open the site should be a welcome or announcement explaining the search thread feature. Because i for one didnt know about it for a while, and it would've helped me out. because you can basically find the answer to any question there without "bothering the oldtimers". lol


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

FinnLandR said:


> It goes both ways, but, I ask this, doesn't the trainer show the pup the way? Lead by example? Just a thought....



Humans are not dogs. So the analogy is imperfect. 

More to the point, do teachers help students? Mostly - if the teachers are really teachers, and the students are really students. There are some teachers and students here and there are some faux teachers and students here.

I would say that - in any endeavor, it is best to observe for a while, to get a sense of the environment and to discover who the teachers are. And I would say that students who ask teachers for advice then discard - or attack - that advice are unlikely to receive many lessons.


----------



## RF2 (May 6, 2008)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


This. If you add a subforum for new folks to ask questions, you have to add a subforum for GDG.


----------



## RF2 (May 6, 2008)

Angie B said:


> Are you kidding??? There's a ton of people that want to answer the newbie questions..
> 
> Since when is being experienced at anything a pre-requisite for a internet forum???
> 
> ...


Hey, there are no stupid questions. Just stupid people asking questions. Right?


----------



## RF2 (May 6, 2008)

Ted Shih said:


> Humans are not dogs. So the analogy is imperfect.
> 
> More to the point, do teachers help students? Mostly - if the teachers are really teachers, and the students are really students. There are some teachers and students here and there are some faux teachers and students here.
> 
> I would say that - in any endeavor, it is best to observe for a while, to get a sense of the environment and to discover who the teachers are. And I would say that students who ask teachers for advice then discard - or attack - that advice are unlikely to receive many lessons.


Excellent post, Ted. It becomes fairly obvious who are the teachers and who are "experienced" on this forum.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

I wanted to just say no, but couldn’t.
Because of the way it is worded.
So I say No, But. 
And I know right off your singing
“You must not no but me, You must not know but me”
But seriously folk.
Maybe a page of just stickiness of classic old posts. Jerry’s original indirect pressure explanation.
Ted’s Sit means sit and that old progression of training by I think /paul… I could be wrong on that.
Along with helpful hints like how to search and stuff like that.
I very much like POTUS and that is what it should be. But I do not think a just new fellers page
Would be helpful. And if they are all there how will the rest of us be able to pick on um???
It would be an Internet AKC Junior Hunt test Gallery! 
Is that the place you want the new folk getting guidance?
THAT CHOKE CHAIN IS AGAINST THE RULE!!!!!!!!
Just have up step up to the main page and roll in the mud with the rest of us.
Have um bring rope!;-)




.


----------



## M&K's Retrievers (May 31, 2009)

No, probably not. I think it would be nice if the experts didn't say anything rather the berate the person asking the question. Isn't it easier to ignore the question all together than to dole out a ration of crap?


----------



## 7pntail (Jan 20, 2010)

Well, from a business standpoint it would be a No-brainer for me. Leave it alone. I doubt the forum will change. I think it is admirable that Chris would even solicit input. He has done an A-plus job, why mess with a thriving website with many hits and new members daily? 

Just a thought and a bit off topic. 

take care, John


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

I think it would be easier to have the newbie posts segregated. Others disagree.

Chris can do as he deems appropriate. He's not only the janitor, but the CEO, and I trust him to to make the right decision.

There are lots of posts that I totally ignore
- Fred Hassen
- John Fallon
- Name my dog

There are some posts that I mostly ignore
- Show v. Field
- HT v FT v Hunting
- UKC v AKC v HRC v NAHRA
- Amish v E collar

I imagine that everyone else has their own list. I think a person reads and/or posts as he/she will and the forum and/or sub forum is largely irrelevant. 

I do think that a number of solid, experienced dog people have left here - such as Mitch Patterson - and that some thought ought to be given as to why


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

Ted Shih said:


> I think it would be easier to have the newbie posts segregated. Others disagree.
> 
> Chris can do as he deems appropriate. He's not only the janitor, but the CEO, and I trust him to to make the right decision.
> 
> ...



I don't blame you , you have never won an argument with me yet.;-)

But,I think you are prevaricating about ignoring my post. Your penchant for mentioning my name leads me to believe otherwise.... and even if you are not, what makes you think that anyone cares that you do. 

Don't let your following of "ME too Ted " types go to your head.

john


----------



## Labs a mundo (Mar 20, 2009)

I voted no.
I'm a newbie to the forum ( albeit long time lurker  ) but not to the sport.

It's my belief that we should treat new members in the same way whether real life or in a forum.

If you were at an event wouldn't you introduce yourself if there was a new face? I'd also guess that you would treat them with respect and answer their questions or respond to their comments. At the very least you'd tell them who would be a good person to assist them with their questions.

How could this forum be viewed any differently?

Each person, new or experienced deserves response. If it's not a question you are prepared to respond to then leave the response for the person who is willing or prepared to give an answer or opinion.

If the question is a repeat of a subject that has been beat to death over the years, then maybe a pleasant response would be a link to a previous thread.


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

Angie B said:


> Nice try Vicky but it doesn't work that way.. Because the title to a thread is not indicative to what the op wants... How would they know??? They don't even understand what they're asking???
> 
> If you haven't noticed this place has changed a ton...
> 
> ...


Did anyone ever notice that the first part of the thread is visible just by placing their cursor on the line of the subject. The title is not all that is "available".

Geez Angie, I've been here as long as you have.....actually a few months longer. Sure the forum has changed....a lot of great people have passed away, others have gotten out of the game and a couple have been banned. I've also seen some people who are wonderful in real life be real "internet jerks" on RTF. 

I don't understand why the forum needs to be revamped......other forums have come and gone....yet RTF remains pretty much self moderated and thriving. 

Let the moaning and complaining stay on the other forums that fold or on FaceBook.

JMHO


----------



## Vicky Trainor (May 19, 2003)

FinnLandR said:


> ... I've already found several posters who I just ignore as best I can, ...


The Ignore feature will allow you to totally ignore those "several posters". 

Go to User CP. When that page opens, look down the column of features on the left hand side. Near the bottom under the category MISCELLANEOUS, you will see the "Buddy/Ignore Lists". Click on that which will open the page to place users on your Buddy List or Ignore List. To add a user to either list, enter their name in the empty boxes for that list and click 'Save List'.


----------



## Mallard Mugger (Jul 29, 2009)

I voted other. Like POTUS (only when there is a blue moon do I visit it), GDG needs its own subforum like RF2 mentioned earlier. I do appreciate those that put it in the title because it makes it easier to avoid them. The problem I have is that they are cluttering up what I came to the forum for - advice on training my dog.

No, I don't post much.
Yes, I do use the search function.
Yes, there is a "Good 'ole Boys" club on here - have no problem with that
Yes, lately a fair amount of newbie posts have turned into soap operas

No to a newbie forum. I like reading about what other trainers are working on and how they are handling it. Some of it I can associate with and I like seeing different views on how it was handled. Some of it I have yet to cross but feel that much better having to cross that bridge when it comes. Some of it I hope to avoid by learning from others mistakes.

Yes, I could look at both forums. However, if you're going to create another forum, make it for the "non-training" (gdg) stuff. Why clutter up the training forum? I'm not saying that gdg doesn't have it's place here, I do enjoy it every now and then, but isn't the RTF mainly for Training??

JMHO

Sorry Chris, got off on a "newbie" (if you go by # of posts) rant. As, stated, voted Other and my explanation kept going. You can thank a long drive home tonight for that, winding down.


----------



## ppro (Jan 14, 2008)

Wow, I read all the posts and conclude I have not seen a consensus of good reason to change anything except to remind the people who know the most that you should know that you don't have to respond. It is incredible we expect new members to be forum literate which makes no sense but those that know all forget how to ignore. It seems the easiest fix, if one is needed, would be for people to be adult enough to keep some of their opinions to themselves if it is not helpful. I am not very computer or forum literate but I do know how to ignore or change to another thread when I don't want to be a part of a certain discussion.


----------



## MoJo (Mar 24, 2004)

I agree with the sentiment already posted that if there were to be a subforum for new folks, it is unlikely to be visited by veterans and would offer little help to new folks.

As you have stated Chris, we need to be patient with the 127th post about housebreaking, crating, FF etc. We were all there at one time. Do unto others should be a universal creed here. And, dont open a thread if there is a chance you might answer in a negative fashion.


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

I voted No, although I think there should be a new forum for the experienced who do not what to answer newbie/romperroom questions, that way they can hang out and blather over each other! 

I like things the way they are, if someone wants to post an answer, good for them, those who do not want to shouldn't, although sometimes they do!

Romper Room Regards!!


----------



## JJaxon (Nov 1, 2009)

I say no, thinking that who will the newbies be asking questions to? The old timers arent likely to be there to answer.


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Leave it the way it is.

When I got invited here, I jumped in and asked some stupid questions in my own special way.
I evidently seemed argumentative in regard to dogs, didn't mean to be.

Learned my lessons and I am very careful what I post on this board.

I learn much reading here.
I pm for more detailed info.
I am treated with far more respect doing it that way than I perhaps deserve or earned here.
I have met some wonderful people and made some terrific friends thru this site.

I figured it out, I probably came into this site wrong.
But it is a huge resource and asset to my dog adventures, and I enjoy posting on the other board.;-)
If I do respond to a newbie, it is generally to encourage them as best I can.

Sometimes life ain't fair, sometimes it's more than fair.


Thank you all for tolerating me.

"Keep on keepin' on.........."


stan b


----------



## dnf777 (Jun 9, 2009)

Ted Shih said:


> I disagree


Me too. Ted was probably a newbie long before this forum existed, but I did, and still do receive very helpful info on this forum from the big dogs, both on line and by PM. More by reading than by typing, BTW. 

perpetual newbie regards....

dave


----------



## Paul Rainbolt (Sep 8, 2003)

Voted no, Its easy for me to not click on post I don't have any interest in.


----------



## H2O_Control_guy (Jul 14, 2009)

I voted no. When I first heard about this forum from I was told that you should have "thick Skin." Yeah I've been chastised by I few people for dumb questions, but there is something about the mix of people, experienced, inexperienced, knuckleheads etc.... that makes this thing work. I've learned a good deal and been well entertained in the process. 

Additionally I for the life of me have no idea why Chris would want to referee what post goes where. This thing ain't broke. Leave the main forum the way it is. 

I do agree with Ken about a place for the classic posts would be really cool. Another idea might be a place for naming threads.

John Buesgens


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

I don't think many care about newbies posting actual training questions, there are some that enjoy, or at least don't mind, explaining FF or CC every other day, that's legit, so are most training questions, right down to what kind of bumper or collar to get, I don't see many newbies getting flamed for that kind of thing, at most they get ignored or are given links to previous threads. The ones that bug alot of people are the new members who start out with something that is a hot topic such as EIC, British Labs, show Labs, etc and you have to wonder if they aren't doing it almost deliberately. There are ways to phrase a question that encourage people to want to answer if they know someone is genuinely looking for info, there are others who phrase their questions so that it almost intentionally is provoking, then they claim to be jumped on when they get the response they provoked. Or don't like the advice and get rude. Maybe it is current society's lack of basic reading, writing & comprehension skills, combined with so many wanting instant gratification now, being spoon fed everything, click a button for an answer, don't bother doing any research on their own. There are some trainers who have given priceless training advice, some long time breeders who are a goldmine for breeding/whelping issues that have been slammed rudely by new members. Yes, there are ascerbic personalities that one needs to be around for a while to understand the nuances, but that's part of the whole culture here, and sometimes, newbies come out swinging, with a chip on their shoulder. There's a definite difference, IMO, between those genuinely asking for help, and those that are looking to start something.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> I don't think many care about newbies posting actual training questions, there are some that enjoy, or at least don't mind, explaining FF or CC every other day, that's legit, so are most training questions, right down to what kind of bumper or collar to get, I don't see many newbies getting flamed for that kind of thing, at most they get ignored or are given links to previous threads. The ones that bug alot of people are the new members who start out with something that is a hot topic such as EIC, British Labs, show Labs, etc and you have to wonder if they aren't doing it almost deliberately. There are ways to phrase a question that encourage people to want to answer if they know someone is genuinely looking for info, there are others who phrase their questions so that it almost intentionally is provoking, then they claim to be jumped on when they get the response they provoked. Or don't like the advice and get rude. Maybe it is current society's lack of basic reading, writing & comprehension skills, combined with so many wanting instant gratification now, being spoon fed everything, click a button for an answer, don't bother doing any research on their own. There are some trainers who have given priceless training advice, some long time breeders who are a goldmine for breeding/whelping issues that have been slammed rudely by new members. Yes, there are ascerbic personalities that one needs to be around for a while to understand the nuances, but that's part of the whole culture here, and sometimes, newbies come out swinging, with a chip on their shoulder. There's a definite difference, IMO, between those genuinely asking for help, and those that are looking to start something.


I completely agree


----------



## Troy B (May 25, 2005)

Chris Atkinson said:


> In my heart-of-hearts, I believe there's a behavioral adjustment needed which tells folks to either ignore newbie posts if they are irritated by the same old-same-old, or try to respond politely.


Couldn't agree more. Voted no.


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

I voted no. 

In thinking about what would actually make this a better place for folks new to training, I think it is best to leave these in the main forum. My rationale is that I really don't think the folks with the experience really to provide any help are going to check the forum that often and it is likely to be populated with the folks who were asking the same questions 3 months ago and are now 'internet experts'.

As it is, noobs may from time to time get dogpiled, especially if they are thin skinned and take exception to someone trying to help but perhaps not being as PC as they could be in the process. And, of course, they will still get advice from folks who really have no business giving it, but if they stay around long enough, they will learn who those folks are and who are the ones with good advice.

I could be wrong, since I am not one of the ones who would give particularly good advice (which is why I refrain from posting training advice for the most part), but I just don't see the folks I have come to respect on this board hanging out in a subforum very often.


----------



## hotel4dogs (Aug 2, 2010)

I agree with the folks who have mentioned a GDG subforum instead. Some of the stuff really doesn't belong in retriever training, really isn't POTUS material, but makes my day when I read it.
JMO.


----------



## Sundown49 aka Otey B (Jan 3, 2003)

Chris, I voted "yes" but I believe everyone has to start. My parents taught me as a child and very well I might add "if you can't say something nice don't say anything at all" . I believe some of the newbies get a reverse of that........Otey


----------



## Tom Mouer (Aug 26, 2003)

I voted "other."
The "Newbies" should be directed to the SEARCH feature that is available on RTF, instead of having the same basic questions answered by the well meaning and frequent "answer persons" here on RTF.
Although some of the "Q&A" threads can be quite entertaining to read, most are like watching "reruns" on TV.


----------



## Clayton Evans (Jun 26, 2008)

One of our Chesapeake forums has a newbe forum and it gets used very little so I voted no.
Clay


----------



## Washu (Apr 13, 2010)

I'm a newbie to this forum and I'm also a newbie to hunt training. Furthermore, I got my lab from a shelter (although she looks like a field dog in appearance my guess is that she is a puppy mill dog or from a "backyard breeder"). She has some shortcomings (lack of drive, gun shyness, separation anxiety) that will probably keep us training at the "newbie level", as far as hunt training, for a VERY long time (she's done very well at other things - agility, rally, obedience).

I voted YES because I'd like to be able to find answers to questions as well as basic retriever training information very easily.

BUT ---- I certainly share a lot of the concerns that other people have posted.
Basically I don't think a newbie sub-forum will work if experienced people do not spend significant time on it.

I have gotten a lot of crappy (in my opinion) suggestions from well meaning but very inexperienced "know-it-all" type people (not on this forum - to my knowledge). Because I have other dog training experience, I think I can usually weed them out? At least I hope!

Maybe sticky notes or informational pages (as so many people have suggested) might be a better answer?


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2011)

Washu said:


> I'm a newbie to this forum and I'm also a newbie to hunt training. Furthermore, I got my lab from a shelter (although she looks like a field dog in appearance my guess is that she is a puppy mill dog or from a "backyard breeder"). She has some shortcomings (lack of drive, gun shyness, separation anxiety) that will probably keep us training at the "newbie level", as far as hunt training, for a VERY long time (she's done very well at other things - agility, rally, obedience).
> 
> I voted YES because I'd like to be able to find answers to questions as well as basic retriever training information very easily.
> 
> ...


Washu,

You are a perfect example of someone those here would be more than eager to help. Thanks for introducing yourself and your four legged friend.

Hope you stick around. 

Melanie

ps If anyone ever responds in a nasty manner to you, PM me and I'll take care of it.


----------



## john fallon (Jun 20, 2003)

dnf777 said:


> . *Ted was probably a newbie long before this forum existed*,
> dave


A common misconception! What made you think that????

john


----------



## Keith Stroyan (Sep 22, 2005)

Chris Atkinson said:


> In my heart-of-hearts, I believe there's a behavioral adjustment needed which tells folks to either ignore newbie posts if they are irritated by the same old-same-old, or try to respond politely.


I voted NO.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

john fallon said:


> A common misconception! What made you think that????
> 
> john


Hi John, I know it probably got past you. The purpose of this thread is to try and get folks to be kind to others.

I feel like I bend over backwards begging you guys to treat others the way you would like to be treated.

Recently, you were upset that Ted indicated he had you on ignore. Yet you continue to pick scabs.

How about if you let Ted answer for his own experience? He doesn't need you to serve as his agent. 

This is the kind of behavior that brings zero value to the forum and makes RTF look like the Jerry Springer show. (which I personally find to be a bummer)

Thanks,

Chris


----------



## Guest (Feb 20, 2011)

It is easy for the folks who have been around the block to not open threads about naming puppies, looking for stud dogs, etc. But when a piranha consistently shows up on productive threads (most recently Lainee's training threads come to mind) and poisons them to the point that they need to be shut down and a new thread needs to be started to continue the topic, that is a HUGE problem.

THAT is a major reason people have left this forum. And many of us are on the verge of doing so. It's just not worth the aggravation.


----------



## Ted Shih (Jan 20, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> How about if you let Ted answer for his own experience? He doesn't need you to serve as his agent.



Fallon as my agent. Now there is a frightening thought. 

A Fellini movie. The theater of the absurd.

There is a reason that I love the ignore button.


----------



## Labs R Us (Jun 25, 2010)

Please, just look at the subject line. If it doesn't interest you, move on. If you feel you'd like to comment, please do so in a kind manner. As the old saying goes...If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

There is a reason that civility is more prevalent in the South than the North, perhaps we have uncovered the cause, WINTER!!!!...70s today in Texas.


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

No Pete-that's why they've got sweet tea. Take the sting out of those hot as hades days. But I'm thinking the good doctor may be on to something. I'm suddenly feeling the need for a padded room-it's either the cold stinky weather or hmmmm I don't know..............


----------



## Becky Mills (Jun 6, 2004)

EdA said:


> There is a reason that civility is more prevalent in the South than the North, perhaps we have uncovered the cause, WINTER!!!!...70s today in Texas.


Or, like me, they were raised to believe Moses ran out of tablet before he could etch the 11th commandent. Thou Shalt Not Be Rude.


----------



## Curt Akeson (Jan 13, 2011)

Labs R Us said:


> Please, just look at the subject line. If it doesn't interest you, move on. If you feel you'd like to comment, please do so in a kind manner. As the old saying goes...If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.


Becky thank you for sharing that thought...relevant to the discussion, plus reminding me how my grandmother lived that philosphy in her life.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Pete said:


> Ed
> Does that flip around in the summer months
> 
> Pete


Not really, while we may complain about summer it does not make us less civil, does not make us confrontational. The sun is imprinted on our DNA, when our ancestors wore few clothes and their lives were in peril the sun offered warmth and growing things which translated to food. The sun makes us feel better about ourselves hence the ancients adoption of the sun as a god!

As someone posted earlier "have you ever heard of anyone retiring to the North?".....


----------



## Bubba (Jan 3, 2003)

Becky Mills said:


> Or, like me, they were raised to believe Moses ran out of tablet before he could etch the 11th commandent. Thou Shalt Not Be Rude.


HahahHAhahHAhaHAhahahahHAhahahaha


Ut OH Looks like I'm going to be in trouble on that one.

This is simple put up a "Yo Noob" sticky:

1. Its Gobble-de-****
2. Silver Labs ain't real dawgs
3. Yes you do need to Force Fetch
4. Tri-Tronics
5. Chessies smell bad and bite
6. Goldens won't get in the water
7. British smittish- it's hype
8. No You can't go to the line with a dern choke chain
9. Don't mess with Melanie
10. Beavers is sacred critters
11. Yada-Yada-Doodles ain't real dawgs
12. They don't point-all hype
13. HRC for hunters by hunters but we don't think we can shoot flyers safely
14. No you really shouldn't breed that dawg.


So if there is any one out there that gets through this- welcome

Trying to help out in the worst way regards

Bubba


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Bubba said:


> This is simple put up a "Yo Noob" sticky:
> 
> 1. Its Gobble-de-****
> 2. Silver Labs ain't real dawgs
> ...


There ya go. Problem solved. Everything you need to know until you are running AA.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Bon has suggested a subforum for new folks to the hobby.
> 
> I've gotten feedback from a number of folks privately indicating interest in that.
> 
> Please, please, if you have taken the time to open this, take just one more second and click a voting button. In this case, your votes count and could influence an RTF move.


Not trying to be disrespectful here but why in the world would you divide up the training questions on this forum into newbie questions (not sure what that extends to, Transition maybe? or possibly your second dog?) and experienced questions. If you want to divide up the forum how about you create a place for retriever training questions and retriever training questions only.
I also suggest a specific area to post photo threads. I love the pictures and sometime miss out on them because I do not click on all the threads.

Jason


----------



## Lily'sPal (Jun 16, 2009)

As a newbie to this sport, I voted other. My concern would be the expierenced trainers that can give the best advice, may not take the time to look at these questions and give answers. If only newbies, like myself are giving the advice, it may not be good advice. I ask many questions here, but give little if any advice since I am new to training and don't feel I have enough experience, or knowledge, to give someone a sound training opinion. 

I too have been hammered on here for what I now know maybe wasn't the smartest question to ask. But, at the time it was a real concern for me and I didn't know the answer, or I wouldn't have asked.


----------



## Colonel Blimp (Jun 1, 2004)

I voted "no". A decent FAQ section would suffice, which newcomers could be directed to. 

I'd like to add one theme to Bubba's list.... "Stop arsing about and get the animal to a Vet"

Eug


----------



## Erin Lynes (Apr 6, 2008)

After mulling it over, I voted 'no'. 

I think that the newbies who honestly need help and assistance shouldn't feel like their questions are less important than anyone elses and I think it would be hard to define the transition from newbie to oldie (yikes, is that the opposite of newbie?) or which questions would go where. I am pretty sure that the tiny minority of folks who are trolling will probably end up posting on the main forum anyway where they will get more attention. 

I also believe there is a benefit to revisiting the 'same old' questions from time to time. Every once and a while, someone is able to provide an answer that makes me go "hmmmm.... maybe that is a better way than how I've always done it." Even the constant "should I breed my EIC carrier" type threads are useful. I know my opinion has certainly changed since the test first came out. Even though the search function can be used to get opinions and information.... some of it is old news and things may have changed since those older posts. I don't have time to read every thread so I try to avoid the ones where the title suggest they may be boring, annoying, or dimly concealed sales pitch  Probably miss out on a lot of great GDG this way but them's the breaks. 

The tone on RTF has changed a bit since the 'be nice to newbies' thread, which is definitely a good thing. If this new attitude keeps up there should be no need to have to protect the newbies.  

My 2 cents


----------



## Steve Amrein (Jun 11, 2004)

I belong to a number of other non dog forums. Some are similar to this forum but some will put a hit out on you or make you feel you should off yourself for asking a noob question thats been done a thousand times. I think the sticky about repeated stuff, how to post a pic and how to use the search should be a Min. Also threads started that fall into those the mods will delete or move. I also feel if someone is being stupid they should be told so. I think thats its OK to grade papers in red ink. Lastly dodge ball is cool and not everyone will be happy.


----------



## Mstormc (Feb 18, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


I agree with the above and voted "No". The other thing I see, not just here but other boards is that there seem to be some internet tough guys. Maybe a little more self control from members could have eliminated this entire thread, IDK.

What about a sticky for "Commonly asked Questions" with links that contain useful info??? Just an idea from this cheddar head.


----------



## RJG (Feb 18, 2005)

Becky Mills said:


> Or, like me, they were raised to believe Moses ran out of tablet before he could etch the 11th commandent. Thou Shalt Not Be Rude.


This is how my Mama raised me as well. 

I voted other because I like the FAQ option. Having a section devoted to FAQ's could answer a lot of repetitive questions for newbies, or folks like me who have short term memory loss (including how to effectively use the search engine) or those who just aren't computer savvy and are happy just to make it to the forum never mind using a search mode.

jmo


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Just an observation, but of the 50 threads on the front page right now I count only 7 that are training questions. I am not saying any of the threads do not belong I'm just saying the majority are not retriever training questions. I would think you would not want to break that number up further.


----------



## Deezel (Sep 28, 2010)

I don't see a "newbie" subforum being of much use to "newbies" given we're new and we don't have much to offer eachother in terms of knowledge/experience. Am I missing something here, is there more to this that i'm not grasping? Wouldn't someone new want to ask someone not new/experienced? Isn't that what the main forum is for since all the regulars/experienced people read and post in there?


----------



## Socks (Nov 13, 2008)

This may be too much to ask, but have a link at the top for FAQ and then have the questions on that page. Then have that page setup loosely like wikipedia. Where the content can be edited or added to and maybe add some links of older theards. Just a thought.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

I think the FAQs option is the best. Someone would have to bring up several old threads. If it didn't answer a specific question then people could ask. What is GDG? What is FF? What is the inheritance of EIC and information-link to U of M; What is the difference between the hunting tests, or hunting tests and field trials; a list of training resources; an explanation of the female's cycle and best times to breed; Just FAQ's for general questions.


----------



## JustinS (May 17, 2009)

I voted yes for the fact that I think their will be threads that explain most of the basic information, which will bring many new people up to date.


----------



## Lenore (Apr 2, 2010)

After thinking a while, I voted no. I do like the idea but I feel that people have to learn to be nice. What helps me when I get the urge to be other than nice, I say over and over, "if I don't have anything nice to say, I am not going to say it." For some reason there has been a rash of rude, snide posts by people. Since our sport isn't always looked at in the nicest/best light, we should all welcome new people and make them feel at home, our sport needs new people. We should be doing all we can to help them become just as addicted as we are!! LOL

BTW I did not read all 11 pages, I am suppose to doing a law paper, when my head starts to swim from all the legal ****, I come here.  Just saying in case someone else said what I did, I didn't mean to repeat.


----------



## Stephen Whitley (Feb 3, 2007)

I voted "other". 

Since the "Exeperienced", as Angie B refers to them, are getting so tired of answering mindless questions and can't seem to ignore the mindless posts, have a subforum for them so they can discuss items of greater importance like technical aspects of training or whatever else they deem important. If they want to participate in the "Regular Joe" forum then they have to ask for permission.


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2011)

Check this out. It is a classic!

http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=66934

Guy asks a question. I promptly respond directing him where he can find his answer only to learn he has me on Ignore. Rainmaker follows up with an even more detailed answer for him:



Rainmaker said:


> Here's even a link to the rules. The index will lead you right to the section dealing with earning the titles. The AKC website isn't the most user friendly but having a copy of the rules saved comes in handy, you can use the "control" + "F" function to search by word if nothing else. http://www.akc.org/pdfs/rulebooks/RFTRET.pdf



And this is how she is thanked:



ducks_n_bucks01 said:


> Thanks for the link. I just don't see how it was easier to write all of that instead of answering my question.


And it gets even better...


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Melanie Foster said:


> Check this out. It is a classic!
> 
> http://www.retrievertraining.net/forums/showthread.php?t=66934
> 
> ...


Some people's rude is someone else's funny - 

I voted Yes - I think it's a great idea - 

Just send Ichibon or whatever his name is to POTUS, we can show him what rude really is . Especially if it's a lefty!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

Marvin S said:


> just send Ichibon or whatever his name is to POTUS, we can show him what rude really is . Especially if it's a lefty!!!!!!!!!!


now that is a plan, he thinks he knows Bull . . . .
he aint seen Bull like we toss in POTUS.
His 8 seconds will seem forever  ;-)



.


----------



## runnindawgz (Oct 3, 2007)

I voted yes.. but I do think we need to make them "sweat" about GDG and seating on a duck ... I mean, we were all there one time too!
PS - Ken - I luv the new avatar!!!!


----------



## Guest (Feb 22, 2011)

Marvin S said:


> Just send Ichibon or whatever his name is to POTUS, we can show him what rude really is .


Even I am too skeered to go to POTUS!


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

Melanie Foster said:


> Even I am too skeered to go to POTUS!


 
Today's word is "pissant". Just give that to the POTUS gatekeeper and you are in like flint. ;-)


----------



## DoubleHaul (Jul 22, 2008)

Stephen Whitley said:


> I voted "other".
> 
> Since the "Exeperienced", as Angie B refers to them, are getting so tired of answering mindless questions and can't seem to ignore the mindless posts, have a subforum for them so they can discuss items of greater importance like technical aspects of training or whatever else they deem important. If they want to participate in the "Regular Joe" forum then they have to ask for permission.


They already do that in the private forum. This is the regular joe forum.


----------



## Marvin S (Nov 29, 2006)

Melanie Foster said:


> Even I am too skeered to go to POTUS!


You'd fit right in. We've got a couple of really sharp ladies there & you'd just add to that. But we don't solve much, like here!!!!!!


----------



## Richard Fuquay (Jun 4, 2006)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I agree with your point completely Susan, which is exactly why I've been avoiding a subforum.
> 
> I'm just seeking some group opinion.
> 
> ...


I voted yes BUT, this is a better alternative. I fear the new subforum would not be of much practical educational use for the newby. Someone with relevant knowledge about a specific problem/issue may well open a thread and offer input now when they are less likely to go the newby forum and participate. A more genteel attitude among the natives would, in my opinion, be more effective. Of course, I am just a persistent newby myself so what do i know..


----------



## HPL (Jan 27, 2011)

I am going to weigh in with those who think there isn't really a need for a sub-forum, but I would like to see at least three things (in no particular order):
1. a place that is so obvious that nobody is likely to miss it with a thorough explanation of how the search function works (requisite number of characters/words etc., and even how to perform an effective search)
2. A place with, for lack of a better term, the best of the best, and I mean INFORMATIVE stuff like "Sit Means Sit".
3. A good list of acronyms and other terms (don't need to include secrets like GDG or the "adult language" stuff) and site info like why some posts are in bold type, and others not, etc. 

I don't really know why so many folks seem to think that newbies need to be afraid to post. So far I haven't seen anybody get really flamed, and it's not like the meanest old curmudgeon can reach out of the screen and punch you or anything. Of course, I'm in my mid 50's, and have had plenty of folks say mean things to me in my life, so ....


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

I got called an idiot at the Indy Foo Foo show. I thought it was pretty funny, and told the guy to tell me something I didn't already know. That shut him up, well that and me hitting the panic button on my truck, launching the big dodge into a flurry of flashing lights with loud horn and alarm. I couldn't hear a word the nice guy had to say after that. 

sticks and stones....


----------



## 2tall (Oct 11, 2006)

Pals said:


> I got called an idiot at the Indy Foo Foo show. I thought it was pretty funny, and told the guy to tell me something I didn't already know. That shut him up, well that and me hitting the panic button on my truck, launching the big dodge into a flurry of flashing lights with loud horn and alarm. I couldn't hear a word the nice guy had to say after that.
> 
> sticks and stones....


Was that kind of a way of sticking your thumbs in your ears, waving your fingers around and yelling LALALALALALA?!?


----------



## roseberry (Jun 22, 2010)

i can't remember how long the new member sign on process to this page takes or if something like this is already a part of it but, Chris could you develop a short "required tutorial" that walks through site operation and features. this tutorial course could force the simulated use of the site and its features to new members before they become new members. 

for example new members would be forced to simulate a search, look for FAQ,s before posting, would be initiated to the use of the ignore button, learn how to use quote features and put smiles on their post as part of becoming a member. everyone "on board" will then know the minimum of education of everyone else "on board" as to the use, the resources and the ettiquete of RTF. 

then, if question on a "beat to death topic" is posted there will be no doubt they should be flamed by the rtfette's. (i love that stuff btw)



or (this is the sarchastic part) a double secret subforum could be initiated. a member is given access to this subforum only after their 500th post. (maybe by a secret online handshake) all these experienced members could go to the double secret subforum and talk all the junk they want about dumb questions on the main forum and never hurt anyones feelings. 

no no.. this is better, maybe when "double secret members" post their a$$ blistering comments they show up as posts on the main forum only visible to other "double secret members". then people could be ridiculed without knowing they are being ridiculed. you could get rings like the masonic lodge when initiated. "hazing" - when you get in you have to read all the double secret posts about yourself...and get paddled obviously.

just some thoughts
john mc


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

As it stands right now I can see 4 of 50 threads on the main page about training retrievers. All 4 seem to be questions that would fit in the "newbie" section but again I don't know what newbie extends to. My point being, again, you do not need to divide up the training threads. I still suggest you make a subforum that contains threads about training retrievers only.


----------



## Montview (Dec 20, 2007)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


That would be my concern as well.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

based on recent postings I think the new sub forum should be 

Golden Retrievers: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow

moderator Melanie Foster


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2011)

EdA said:


> based on recent postings I think the new sub forum should be
> 
> Golden Retrievers: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow
> 
> moderator Melanie Foster


Would I get to kick people off the island? If so, I'm all over it. Dr Ed, we'll discuss the terms of immunity later.


----------



## EdA (May 13, 2003)

Melanie Foster said:


> Would I get to kick people off the island? If so, I'm all over it. Dr Ed, we'll discuss the terms of immunity later.


As the moderator I assume you can do whatever you want

Seriously however I see field trial results from trial X, there are 10 posts about the qualifying and none about the Open or Amateur.....

This weekend in Alabama an FC-AFC Labrador qualified for the National Amateur and there was only a single post, what's up with that?


----------



## badbullgator (Dec 20, 2004)

One already exist, it is called waterdog


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2011)

EdA said:


> Seriously however I see field trial results from trial X, there are 10 posts about the qualifying and none about the Open or Amateur.....
> 
> This weekend in Alabama an FC-AFC Labrador qualified for the National Amateur and there was only a single post, what's up with that?


I know, it gets a little out of hand at times. 

But thanks for getting me to go look at the results for trial X. Need to send a woohoo to Suzan. I have a note from her in my in box about you know what and I would have felt bad if I missed the congrats.


----------



## MoJo (Mar 24, 2004)

Chris Atkinson said:


> In my heart-of-hearts, I believe there's a behavioral adjustment needed which tells folks to either ignore newbie posts if they are irritated by the same old-same-old, or try to respond politely.
> Thanks, Chris


My respect for you knows no bounds, and I laud your willingness to entertain this idea. However, I think that "those in the know" will not visit this subforum. That being said, from whom do the new want to hear? Other new folks or the ones who have been around the block a time or two or ten?

I agree that the climate has changed here as of late, and I think this is a great thing - fresh blood should be welcomed with open arms and given a chance. Yes the 457th posting regarding a dog that drops the bird on the way back from a retrieve and has not been force fetched is challenging. So don't read it.

Offer them a welcome, as they have chosen to be a part of this resource, then leave it at that

For the new folks, many of you appear to be younger and have grown up in an age that is very different than that which some of the older folk (one of whom is I) have done, and I for one find it very difficult to read some of the things you write. Writing is not texting. If you could please try to use appropriate capitalization, punctuation and grammar, I for one would be more interested in responding to your posts. I am more likely to read something that I find to be easily readable. 

I hope this comes across as constructive and not negatively as the latter is not my intent.

Grammar lessons available as per your request regards,


----------



## dnf777 (Jun 9, 2009)

MoJo said:


> Writing is not texting. If you could please try to use appropriate capitalization, punctuation and grammar, I for one would be more interested in responding to your posts. I am more likely to read something that I find to be easily readable.
> 
> 
> Grammar lessons available as per your request regards,


ROTFLMAO!!! YGBKM!!! 

u speak 4me2!


----------



## Guest (Mar 29, 2011)

dnf777 said:


> ROTFLMAO!!! YGBKM!!!
> 
> u speak 4me2!


If only to be 19 again...


----------



## Jo Ann Reynolds (Jul 2, 2007)

Great question. I voted other. I concur with several others that an easy to find place with stickies of classic posts would be of great benefit to newbies and not so newbies. Someone mentioned a tutorial for newbies on how to use the site and I think that's a good idea, too.

Not sure separating out the training posts from the GDG is a good idea. I think a lot of the draw to RTF is the entertainment value of the GDG. If it were all training questions I think there would be less traffic and perhaps a bit duller, well, except for the seat on a duck questions.


----------



## T-Pines (Apr 17, 2007)

HPL said:


> I am going to weigh in with those who think there isn't really a need for a sub-forum, but I would like to see at least three things (in no particular order):
> 1. a place that is so obvious that nobody is likely to miss it with a thorough explanation of how the search function works (requisite number of characters/words etc., and even how to perform an effective search)
> 2. A place with, for lack of a better term, the best of the best, and I mean INFORMATIVE stuff like "Sit Means Sit".
> 3. A good list of acronyms and other terms (don't need to include secrets like GDG or the "adult language" stuff) and site info like why some posts are in bold type, and others not, etc.
> ...


I tried to read through this entire thread in order to avoid being repetitive. HPLs ideas above impressed me as relatively simple improvements that target certain RTF weaknesses, without upsetting the successful (overall) RTF dynamic.

HPL's item 2 intrigues me. This is something that could be "built" over time. A process could be devised whereby an interested volunteer (with permission from the management) could assemble a summary of past "best of" posts (or links) on a given topic. Input from the community may be appropriate before the summary is submitted to the management for approval. Over time and evolution, a quick and easy reference section on key topics would be available to new retriever trainers. To the extent that it approaches a wiki is beyond my vision.

Regarding a person's credentials to contribute, or in assessing his value to RTF, the ability to be respectful is far more important to me than knowledge of dogs. Disagreement, offered with respect, is not wrong and can be helpful when it challenges someone to become better. Growth comes from challenge and conflict. Maybe RTF members should be rated by their peers on how well they are able to be respectful.

There is a principle of learning that says that one learns by teaching others. So, when someone attempts to answer a question before acheiving expert status, he is practicing good learning. As we know from training our dogs, good learning involves repetition. Others can agree or disagree .. with RESPECT ... to foster that learning.

Respectfully,
Jim


----------



## Gerry Clinchy (Aug 7, 2007)

Julie R. said:


> Well, I was all set to vote for creation of a newbie forum, but decided to read the thread first. And I'm glad I did, because I agree with the sentiments of others that the help pool might be narrowed, and because I don't think the culture here is bad at all compared to many other BBs.
> 
> But I do think it might be well worthwhile making an information page that would include useful stuff for novice trainers as well as those new to this site and/or dog sites in general. Definitely a glossary of terms, maybe alphabetically & in 2 separate categories: dog related terms and abbreviations used by retriever folks and terms and abbreviations unique to RTF or dog boards generally. It could also have stickied "hall of fame" threads like seat on a duck, or Jerry's classic indirect pressure, swishy moderator, etc. and maybe an archives of some of the best responses to questions like FF, stick fetch, FTP, pattern blinds, different testing organizations' rulebooks, etc., the common questions newbies ask about.
> 
> ...


Voted other ... could also have been a "no" if I hadn't read the thread.

The FAQ sub-forum could be helpful to new members for some basic information. Then when they pose questions to the main forum they will be able to ask the right questions for their particular problem.


----------



## Tom Mouer (Aug 26, 2003)

There are many. many more sources of information available for the novice handlers. DVDs,books, and Retriever clubs and most important, training groups.
But I believe that in the 21st century, most novices think the quick answers are just a "click" away.
This "instant answer" service tends to bring out many well meaning "folks" with correct and incorrect answers and solutions.
The reading of this material can be quite entertaining. 
Let the readers and contrubutors sort the "wheat from the chaff."
I am glad that Chis has had the patience and foresight to keep this forum as a place for Retriever people to meet.
Chris, I Thank you, and I am sure that I am not alone.


----------



## Cindy B (Nov 1, 2010)

BonMallari said:


> I too thought it was a good idea when I brought it up, but when someone pointed out your exact rationale, I realized it may not work logistically...I too voted NO, because I realized the subforum may work initially but would soon have crickets chirping...
> 
> Change for the sake of change is not always good...


I agree. Although it sounded like a good idea at first, even using stickies for newbies to refer to, I don't feel that their responses or questions would get quality responses or answers. Just remember that they are New with New questions (to them).


----------



## John Lash (Sep 19, 2006)

"Dumb questions" and going over and over basic subjects is the usual everywhere, not just on RTF.

If you've ever subscribed to a magazine that specializes in a certain sport or hobby it's the same thing. There's only so much "new" content. After subscribing for awhile I usually get tired of them rephrasing the same content, and the subscription lapses.

The difference here is the readers and responders also provide content. If someone asks a question you consider beneath you, just ignore it. If you feel you can help, please do. It sometimes makes for interesting reading. The quick answer of "use the search function," isn't as interesting.


----------



## rjambar (Nov 27, 2010)

While I realize I am still green as can be, I cringe to think of some of the things I posted just a few short months ago when I first joined. My only excuse is that I was so ignorant that I didn't even realize my questions were ignorant. I do appreciate those that took time to answer my repetitive (to anyone who has been a member for awhile) questions and those that took me by the hand and helped me find priceless things such as the search function and PM's. 

The best advice I ever recieved on this forum was READ ALOT, POST A LITTLE AND ALWAYS READ YOUR POST BEFORE YOU HIT SUBMIT. At the time I almost took offense to this advice, but now that I look back, I realize that it was great advice and was meant to help me. 

I voted no to this because I like being able to read the posts by all members, new and old alike. I do agree that an info or FAQ page listing some of the most frequently asked questions would be helpful. I honestly believe that most people should understand that one of the problems with internet communication is that it is impossible to read the inflection in a person's comment often causing a misunderstanding of the person's intent.

Oftentimes what is taken as a curt and rude answer to a question is actually just a person, who has on numerous past occasions, offered the same answer to a new member time and time again, presenting the needed info in the most efficient means possible. On the other hand, we should all remember that the person asking the question may not (most probably does not) realize that this is a "stupid question."

Carry on RTF, we would be lost without you! (What the heck else would I do at night, I've got three kids and another on the way! Its not like I can have a life besides this! lol)


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

What's the name of the forum we are currently posting and responding in? "RTF - Retriever Training Forum"

I vote we move everything NOT* Retriever Training * somewhere else. Give GDG their own subforum.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> There are many. many more sources of information available for the novice handlers. DVDs,books, and Retriever clubs and most important, training groups.
> But I believe that in the 21st century, most novices think the quick answers are just a "click" away.
> This "instant answer" service tends to bring out many well meaning "folks" with correct and incorrect answers and solutions.
> The reading of this material can be quite entertaining.
> ...


Amen




> Dumb questions" and going over and over basic subjects is the usual everywhere, not just on RTF.
> 
> If you've ever subscribed to a magazine that specializes in a certain sport or hobby it's the same thing. There's only so much "new" content. After subscribing for awhile I usually get tired of them rephrasing the same content, and the subscription lapses.
> 
> The difference here is the readers and responders also provide content. If someone asks a question you consider beneath you, just ignore it. If you feel you can help, please do. It sometimes makes for interesting reading. The quick answer of "use the search function," isn't as interesting. Yesterday 08:00 PM


And Amen

I think the only thing this forum lacks is a place to discuss very technical and heady subjects. About once a year someone tries and then it gets derailed. But for the most part there is something for everyone.

Pete


----------



## Obabikon (Jul 1, 2009)

I voted other.

Reason being, is that the new subforum that I think is _*actually *_needed (and would minimize some of the newbie backlash you all mention) is a "Practical Meat Dog" forum.

Please hear me out.......when I first found this site, I hardly new Hunt Tests/Field Trials EXISTED and I frankly still don't know or care anything about them. I remember thinking, "Wow, I've found a great place to get information from other *hunters *on practical ways to train my *hunting dog *."

I'm ashamed to say it took me a long time to figure out that this site is dominated not by average hunters with average goals for their average gun dogs, but by elite amatuer/pro trainers who (no disrespect intended) seem to live in their own little world of hunt tests and field trials.

What I've learned since then is that there's a big disconnect between the mentality, priorities and methods of many of RTF's hardcore HT/FT folks and the common hunter who just wants a dog that will pick up a handful of ducks and roosters each fall. The guy who doesn't have the means, need or desire to invest countless hundreds of hours in training, following a program to reach goals and train behaviors that are virtually useless (or even counter-productive) to him.

I'd guess that a large percentage of the newbies you all refer to fit the description of the common hunter I've described (and am). 

So it's not surprising that so many pissing matches start--after all we're coming from such different perspectives!!!!!

Having a place where plain ol' meat hunters could get the info they want from like-minded folks would eliminate many of these conflicts and misunderstandings and give everyone what they want!

Thanks

Ryan


----------



## Robert (Feb 28, 2006)

I voted no as we've all been newbies, but it would be nice to sort through the clutter.

HOW ABOUT A SEPERATE FORUM FOR GDG? NOW THAT WOULD HELP!


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

Obabikon said:


> I'm ashamed to say it took me a long time to figure out that this site is dominated not by average hunters with average goals for their average gun dogs, but by elite amatuer/pro trainers who (no disrespect intended) seem to live in their own little world of hunt tests and field trials.


Actually, its probably more accurate to say that the majority of folks on this forum are or started out duck hunting, wanted a better duck dog, and kept building as they went. Now they have another "off season" hobby. I don't think I know a single hunt tester (including the ladies) that is not also a duck hunter. The reason that there are so many "test/trial" folks on a DOG TRAINING forum, is because test/trial folks DO THE MOST DOG TRAINING. ;-) They are the most interested in it, and passionate about it. 



Obabikon said:


> What I've learned since then is that there's a big disconnect between the mentality, priorities and methods of many of RTF's hardcore HT/FT folks and the common hunter who just wants a dog that will pick up a handful of ducks and roosters each fall. The guy who doesn't have the means, need or desire to invest countless hundreds of hours in training, following a program to reach goals and train behaviors that are virtually useless (or even counter-productive) to him.


I suspect the "disconnect" is really not that big, if any. All dogs that are going to "hunt" should have the same basic set of skills, up through transition, unless you want to hunt with a pocket full of rocks. I am trying to come up with a single "counter productive" behavior for my hunting dog that is part of HT training (or FT training). If you ask a question couched in "meat dog" terms, I have found there is usually a "meat dog" reply. 

Remember what Bruce Lee said: Study everything. Take what works for you. Discard what does not. And be glad there is a resource like this available for FREE.


----------



## Kenneth Niles Bora (Jul 1, 2004)

The fully trained hunting dog will encounter and be able to deal with so many more variables than could ever occur at a trial or test.
But just like in testing there is the once a summer junior hunt test handler and the every weekend on the circuit trial winner.
So it is in hunting, the “Opening day wannabe” followed by the when we can get out types to the “Every Day Of The Season” not a guide but guides ask you where the birds are kind of guy.
It is all good and we all do what we can and want to do more.
Yet it does chafe me when a feller says a hunting dog don’t need all that trainin’
Doesn’t a kid on the back pond who will never play for the pro’s still work for hours
On the perfect top corner of the net slap shot?


.


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

Ken Bora said:


> The fully trained hunting dog will encounter and be able to deal with so many more variables than could ever occur at a trial or test.
> But just like in testing there is the once a summer junior hunt test handler and the every weekend on the circuit trial winner.
> So it is in hunting, the “Opening day wannabe” followed by the when we can get out types to the “Every Day Of The Season” not a guide but guides ask you where the birds are kind of guy.
> It is all good and we all do what we can and want to do more.
> ...


Exactly right, I think.


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

I agree with the 2 posts above, I am a waterfowl hunter first and foremost. I wont trade a weekend of duck hunting to go to a trial or test, aint no way in hell.

That being said I love keeping my dog and myself sharp in the off season and I know the dog loves it. When I get home from work and let my dog out of his kennel he will head straight for the truck...I will have to call him back to the yard so he can air, THEN we will go train. You have got to put the time in to get a well trained duck hunting partner OR pay a pro to do it.


----------



## Laura McCaw (Jul 28, 2010)

Obabikon said:


> I voted other.
> 
> Reason being, is that the new subforum that I think is _*actually *_needed (and would minimize some of the newbie backlash you all mention) is a "Practical Meat Dog" forum.
> 
> ...


I completely agree!


----------



## Kirk Keene (Jul 20, 2009)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


I agree...as this is the problem I've seen with other forums.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Obabikon said:


> I voted other.
> 
> Reason being, is that the new subforum that I think is _*actually *_needed (and would minimize some of the newbie backlash you all mention) is a "Practical Meat Dog" forum.
> 
> ...


Ryan,

What "goals and train behaviors" do you feel are useless or counterproductive? I'm not interested in starting an arguement. I am just interested in your thoughts and understanding of what a retriever needs to know or doesn't need to know.

Same question for you Laura


----------



## Obabikon (Jul 1, 2009)

Ken Bora said:


> Doesn’t a kid on the back pond who will never play for the pro’s still work for hours
> On the perfect top corner of the net slap shot?.




Well, no. At least not me. And I think your answer (which I certainly respect and admire), clearly illustrates the disconnect I mentioned. 

I never played hockey so I'll use my baseball "career." By high-school, I knew what my skills, desire and future in the sport were, so rather than blow all my time working on my curveball, I went fishing, went turkey hunting, went bow-hunting, practice shooting my bow for said bow-hunting, chased girls, studied so I could get into the college I wanted, etc., etc., etc.

I still played baseball and enjoyed it, but I only put into it the time and effort that I felt it deserved in the grand scheme of things.

Same goes for me (and I know countless others) when it comes to gun dogs. Considering all our other pursuits--family, fishing, other hunting, work, some of us can't justify the amount or kind of training needed to get a dog trained to the levels the RTF majority would want.

We don't want another off season hobby--we already have too many as it is!


----------



## Obabikon (Jul 1, 2009)

GulfCoast said:


> I suspect the "disconnect" is really not that big, if any. All dogs that are going to "hunt" should have the same basic set of skills, up through transition, unless you want to hunt with a pocket full of rocks. I am trying to come up with a single "counter productive" behavior for my hunting dog that is part of HT training (or FT training). If you ask a question couched in "meat dog" terms, I have found there is usually a "meat dog" reply.


I hear you. But again, I think you might not realize how elite or advanced you really are (and I'm not saying that's a bad thing). I mean, for an example, all my in-laws who've hunted ducks hard their whole lives REALLY think you are SUPPOSED to hunt ducks with a pocketful of rocks 

I'm not quite that bad, nor do I agree with them, but I say that to point out that everyone has different goals and expectations. And many of us are satisfied--even thrilled--with much less than others.

That's not a bad thing....different strokes for different folks, right?

JTfreeman, the answer above applies to your question a bit. To clarify a bit more, though, "unnecessary" might be too strong a term. "Low-priority" is more appropriate. After all, I'd estimate that 80 percent of birds I shoot are marks to the dog........yet 80-plus percent of training seems to be centered on getting a dog to handle on blinds.

To me, that seems a little impractical for a casual hunter when they can almost always walk the dog to the area of the fall, or (God forbid) throw a rock.

As for "counterproductive" stuff, I was referring to bank-running in cold water. And again I now realize that "counterproductive" was probably a poor choice of words, as I know that dogs that run/swim straight lines and stay in the water will ultimately retrive more birds over the long haul. 

I know all this probably sounds like fingernails on a chalkboard to dedicated, passionate trainers like all of you, and I don't blame you. I'd feel the same way.

That's why I suggested the meat dog forum idea.......folks with different goals wouldn't have to get riled up by each other.....as much anyway 

Respectfully,

Ryan


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

There are three times more hunters in the US than commonly published. Last I checked I think it was somewhere around 45 million. A large majority of them never get involved in the dog game.

I would think it's kennels and trainers that make up the majority at a FT because they get something from the sport in return. Hunters will often take dogs from a shelter and do what they need to do.

I would think if you wanted to see a big boost in events you could have an open day..

Sorta like a race track has an open day "run what you brung". I think it would be a great way to get more people into the sport and interested in better dogs and better training.


----------



## Laura McCaw (Jul 28, 2010)

jtfreeman said:


> Ryan,
> 
> What "goals and train behaviors" do you feel are useless or counterproductive? I'm not interested in starting an arguement. I am just interested in your thoughts and understanding of what a retriever needs to know or doesn't need to know.
> 
> Same question for you Laura


I don't think they are useless, BUT before I have ever even heard of hunt test or field trials or before joining this forum, I have done my own thing with my dogs. Never knew about certain programs to follow or what not. I have a boy who I bought back in 2006 and he is our primary meat dog. I worked the basic OB with him and also as I went on. We never went through a training period, we just learned together and did our own thing. He rode with me everywhere, learned what was to be expected of him and what was not. When it was time to go hunting, we just up and went, no preparing for it. We were just a team. The end result has been a very well mannered, steady, lovable and EXCELLENT hunting partner who is a joy to take places and who is the most wonderful family companion. So I guess you could call him your typical meat dog. Well, then I join the forum... I find a program that so many people recommend and decide to follow it with one of my pups and now I am not getting results that I prefer in our home. Every dog is different, but for just a good ole hunting partner and family companion, I do not feel that I HAVE to go and buy all this expensive material to have a great dog on my hands. My boy Duke was never FF or E-Collar conditioned and he is now 5 yrs old and has never failed me on a hunt. 

I just feel that when I want help in certain areas, I get the same advice about these programs and FF and the collar which I am completely not against, but I am sure the average hunter does not have to have all this to get a successful hunting dog. We have always had at the minimum of 5 dogs growing up that we hunted with and we have never had a bad dog and we just did our thing with them. 

I do plan on getting into hunt test as I think it will be fun, BUT I am a stay at home mother with 2 small kids and a husband that is not interested too much in the outdoors as much as he is in his video games, so everything to be done has to be done by me with my dogs and I do not have the time for a strict training regimen, so if that means my dogs will never be successful then I guess they will just have to stick to being meat dogs the way I work with them now, but I have to say I am completely satisfied with what I have and our labs are the joy of my life. 

But as a newbie (not to labs or hunting), but to hunt test, I appreciate the advice, but sometimes it seems I am not getting answers that I feel right for my lifestyle at the moment and I do not want to go out and spend $100s on training gear when I have had success without it.

I really enjoy the forum to great ends, but it would be nice for a section for just your average hunters and nothing more.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Obabikon said:


> I hear you. But again, I think you might not realize how elite or advanced you really are (and I'm not saying that's a bad thing). I mean, for an example, all my in-laws who've hunted ducks hard their whole lives REALLY think you are SUPPOSED to hunt ducks with a pocketful of rocks
> 
> I'm not quite that bad, nor do I agree with them, but I say that to point out that everyone has different goals and expectations. And many of us are satisfied--even thrilled--with much less than others.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the answer and fair enough.

I started out just wanting a meat dog just two years ago (didn't know there was anything else to be honest) and decided I loved the training and the results so that is why I train to the level I do.

As for carrying a "pocket full of handles" on your duck hunts. Go for it. It doesn't bother me a bit. I may think it is silly but then again I may seem silly to the guy who thinks I could have saved myself a lot of time and money training by just carrying a pocket full of rocks on my hunts.


----------



## Howard N (Jan 3, 2003)

> I vote we move everything NOT* Retriever Training *somewhere else. Give GDG their own subforum.


Aw man, what would be the fun of that?




> I know all this probably sounds like fingernails on a chalkboard to dedicated, passionate trainers like all of you, and I don't blame you. I'd feel the same way.


Just different goals I think. I want to win field trials and I train hard for it. I train every day and have a fair idea of what works and what doesn't.

You don't need to train to my level to get a dog who will pick up your ducks. Like you and I said, different goals. Doesn't mean we can't get along on the forum. 

Now lets get back to something important, like force fetch.


----------



## Laura McCaw (Jul 28, 2010)

jtfreeman said:


> Thanks for the answer and fair enough.
> 
> I started out just wanting a meat dog just two years ago (didn't know there was anything else to be honest) and decided I loved the training and the results so that is why I train to the level I do.
> 
> As for carrying a "pocket full of handles" on your duck hunts. Go for it. It doesn't bother me a bit. I may think it is silly but then again I may seem silly to the guy who thinks I could have saved myself a lot of time and money training by just carrying a pocket full of rocks on my hunts.


I am sure when my kids are older and I have more time and hopefully my husband decides he likes the outdoors as much as I do, lol... I will be where you are (hopefully) fingers crossed.  Hunt Tests sure look fun, but I already had to scratch my first and only two because of our ill 5 month old son. Times are hard.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Laura McCaw said:


> I don't think they are useless, BUT before I have ever even heard of hunt test or field trials or before joining this forum, I have done my own thing with my dogs. Never knew about certain programs to follow or what not. I have a boy who I bought back in 2006 and he is our primary meat dog. I worked the basic OB with him and also as I went on. We never went through a training period, we just learned together and did our own thing. He rode with me everywhere, learned what was to be expected of him and what was not. When it was time to go hunting, we just up and went, no preparing for it. We were just a team. The end result has been a very well mannered, steady, lovable and EXCELLENT hunting partner who is a joy to take places and who is the most wonderful family companion. So I guess you could call him your typical meat dog. Well, then I join the forum... I find a program that so many people recommend and decide to follow it with one of my pups and now I am not getting results that I prefer in our home. Every dog is different, but for just a good ole hunting partner and family companion, I do not feel that I HAVE to go and buy all this expensive material to have a great dog on my hands. My boy Duke was never FF or E-Collar conditioned and he is now 5 yrs old and has never failed me on a hunt.
> 
> I just feel that when I want help in certain areas, I get the same advice about these programs and FF and the collar which I am completely not against, but I am sure the average hunter does not have to have all this to get a successful hunting dog. We have always had at the minimum of 5 dogs growing up that we hunted with and we have never had a bad dog and we just did our thing with them.
> 
> ...


As with Ryan, I understand and thanks for answering.

It is a very tough balance between dogs, training and family. I struggle with that myself. I don't have an answer for how to get training advice catered to your specific situation other than to say you should find someone who knows you and your situation and retriever training to get advice from. On this forum you are going to get the advice of 1.) follow a modern retriever training program, 2.) work with a Pro or proven and experienced training group, 3.) and of course, read the rule book. When you do these things you can ask very specific questions using the correct terminology and you can get some answers sometimes that are worth the time it took to read them.

There are other forums that are much more directed toward meat dogs. I get on one from time to time that is associated with a very popular waterdog show and I have a local one here in Georgia. I'm not trying to drive you away for this forum by any means but you may want to visit other forums to have a better opportuinity to get your advice.


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Howard N said:


> Now lets get back to something important, like force fetch.


Uh ah:robot:


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Laura McCaw said:


> I am sure when my kids are older and I have more time and hopefully my husband decides he likes the outdoors as much as I do, lol... I will be where you are (hopefully) fingers crossed.  Hunt Tests sure look fun, but I already had to scratch my first and only two because of our ill 5 month old son. Times are hard.


I'm sorry to hear about your son. I hope all is well now.

I also wanted to say you should read the book Merle's Door by Ted Kerasote. It is about a guy (Ted) and his lab who seems to have trained him much the same way you have trained yours. I'm about a third of the way through it now and am enjoying it.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> To me, that seems a little impractical for a casual hunter when they can almost always walk the dog to the area of the fall, or (God forbid) throw a rock


I think the biggest problem with this assumption is that most any question a duck hunter who has little interest in training ,,,, can be answered as follows.
Stake your dog down so it doesn't break and carry a pocket full of rocks.
with those two pieces of advice I can have a decent duck dog.

Pete


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Pete said:


> I think the biggest problem with this assumption is that most any question a duck hunter who has little interest in training ,,,, can be answered as follows.
> Stake your dog down so it doesn't break and carry a pocket full of rocks.
> with those two pieces of advice I can have a decent duck dog.
> 
> Pete


Dang, Pete, you nailed that one. Kinda what I was thinking.


----------



## Obabikon (Jul 1, 2009)

Pete said:


> I think the biggest problem with this assumption is that most any question a duck hunter who has little interest in training ,,,, can be answered as follows.
> Stake your dog down so it doesn't break and carry a pocket full of rocks.
> with those two pieces of advice I can have a decent duck dog.
> 
> Pete


Well Rainmaker may think you nailed it, but I don't know what you're even driving at....

I'm guessing you might be saying that the problem with a forum for casual meat dog hunters is that all the answers would be dirt-simple.....ie, stake your dog down and carry rocks.

And if that is what you're trying to say, I guess I see your point. After all, how long can a forum last or be useful if that's the only advice given? 

But if you're trying to say that I have no interest in training or that I advocate a stake/rocks as means of hunting, you've got me wrong.


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

New Subforum- (?)

If it ain't broke don't fix it 

I've not met one person that didn't want a little more, and sometimes a LOT more out of their "Meatdog" after it was "trained"..(incuding myself)..Sooner or later someone is going to have a question on how to get more..I'd certainly hope that this person will not get banished back "to your own subforum", for stepping "out of bounds" simply because they couldn't afford a lot of training equipment...It took years for me to accumulate everything I wanted, I know that..Sheesh, a single parent raising a young daughter... it wasn't easy..

Lots of dogs were successful in Tests/Trials before the first remote winger came off of the production line, and trained with nothing more than a hand held launcher, (and a sling shot, Im sure.. ;-))
When I logged in a while ago , I logged in to RTF-_ Retriever Training Forum_... not SRTF-(Segregated Retriever Training Forum)..Hope it doesn't change..


----------



## Brad B (Apr 29, 2004)

No because the main forum is where everyone would be giving advice which the newbies are looking for. The old cranky folks should just learn to skip over a topic if they don't have anything constructive to say.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

PackLeader said:


> There are three times more hunters in the US than commonly published. Last I checked I think it was somewhere around 45 million. A large majority of them never get involved in the dog game.
> 
> I would think it's kennels and trainers that make up the majority at a FT because they get something from the sport in return. Hunters will often take dogs from a shelter and do what they need to do.
> 
> ...


I thought they called that NAHRA? :snipersmile:


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Rick_C said:


> I thought they called that NAHRA? :snipersmile:


I'm talking show up and run your dog. Non of them offer that, you still need to register with NAHRA.




caglatz said:


> NAHRA allows for an unpapered dog to run in their events as well. they just need to register for a Field Trial Number (FTN)... (from the Q&A section of the rules)
> 
> Basically, the FTN is required for all non-registered dogs, mixed breed dogs and dogs that are not recognized by NAHRA as a hunting retriever. A dog with a FTN is eligible to run NAHRA tests and to be awarded ribbons for passing tests, but it is not eligible to earn NAHRA titles.
> 
> ...


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

I realize Jamie. It was just a joke. 

But it looks like as long as your dog is registered (with AKC for example) you're good to go.


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

> And if that is what you're trying to say, I guess I see your point. After all, how long can a forum last or be useful if that's the only advice given?


Thank you for understanding the underlying message. Most duck hunters do well with a rope and a pocket of rocks. Their goal is ducks ,,not dog work,,and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. My very first gun dog was a half breed with no formal training. All on the job. He was as good as any gun dog around except he would only get wet up to his noodles. The way I fixed it was to only shoot ducks in water that wasn't any deeper than his noodles. And bring a fishing rod with a trebble hook just in case. We lost few birds doing it this way.

Most people evolve to the point the ducks are not nearly as important as the dog work. I know I did. And that will change the way a question is answered 

Pete


----------



## sinned (Feb 14, 2009)

i say yes. a safe harbor of sorts where no one had to worry about someone wailing on them for asking a question, no matter how remedial or basic that it may be. a place for good basic info.

it should be a NEUTRAL place, kinda like portugal (notice i did not say switzerland.) 
a NO-FLAME zone, with no tolerance period for agression. no cutsey banter that can be misconstrued, we have enough of that already. new people don;t get that.


----------



## 7pntail (Jan 20, 2010)

Wow, Interesting. Kinda fun to lurk and get a different perspective. Nice to see a few new folks as well. Thinking of changing my vote, and have a possible new name for a sub forum. 

Hope all of your dawgs are waggin their tail's, and licking your face!

Take care all, John


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> Reason being, is that the new subforum that I think is _*actually *_needed (and would minimize some of the newbie backlash you all mention) is a "Practical Meat Dog" forum.


Try the Refuge Forums. They may be more to your liking although most of them still follow a program.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

PackLeader said:


> There are three times more hunters in the US than commonly published. Last I checked I think it was somewhere around 45 million. A large majority of them never get involved in the dog game.
> 
> I would think it's kennels and trainers that make up the majority at a FT because they get something from the sport in return. Hunters will often take dogs from a shelter and do what they need to do.
> 
> ...


Jamie, I am on the road and have been offline alot so please excuse my disconnected question.

What does the above commentary have to do with adding a subforum to the RTF menu of discussion boards?

Thanks, Chris


----------



## PackLeader (Jan 12, 2009)

Probably nothing.

Just that a typical hunter who has a $200 shotgun and a mix breed dog that gets out twice a year might not have the means or desire to spend $400 on an e-collar, $300 on training DVDs, and the next 8 months to spend training a dog. 

Hunting is an expensive hobby before you even get into the dog stuff. So if a new section is warranted maybe it should be geared toward them. 

That's all I'm saying.


----------



## Mike Tome (Jul 22, 2004)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


ditto.......


----------



## Pals (Jul 29, 2008)

sinned said:


> i say yes. a safe harbor of sorts where no one had to worry about someone wailing on them for asking a question, no matter how remedial or basic that it may be. a place for good basic info.
> 
> it should be a NEUTRAL place, kinda like portugal (notice i did not say switzerland.)
> a NO-FLAME zone, with no tolerance period for agression. no cutsey banter that can be misconstrued, we have enough of that already. new people don;t get that.


Sorry but I disagree with you completely. RTF is what it is, a good place to "meet" people, talk dogs, life, ask questions and get a little advice from time to time. You want to take the personality out of RTF and turn it into a mambie pambie land. It's not broke, don't fix it. When you get thousands of people together they are not going to all like each other, as long as they are not mean and ugly what difference does it make? The banter gives this place some flavor and the majority of the time, it helps to make a point in a fun way that perhaps some people don't like. Tough. I've been flamed and you what? I had it coming. I've been on the receiving end of jokes, mostly about the goldens. It's a joke, if it got to pointed I gave it right back. RTF is a wonderful resource for people who are passionate about their dogs, that passion can get heated at times. Making some sub forum for people who get their feelings hurt all the time is ridiculous and reeks of PC hooey.


----------



## GulfCoast (Sep 24, 2007)

The more I think about it, the issue seems to come down to folks who want the forum to conform to their desires, remake itself or part of itself to suit them, rather than conform to the forum.


----------



## duk4me (Feb 20, 2008)

Pals said:


> Sorry but I disagree with you completely. RTF is what it is, a good place to "meet" people, talk dogs, life, ask questions and get a little advice from time to time. You want to take the personality out of RTF and turn it into a mambie pambie land. It's not broke, don't fix it. When you get thousands of people together they are not going to all like each other, as long as they are not mean and ugly what difference does it make? The banter gives this place some flavor and the majority of the time, it helps to make a point in a fun way that perhaps some people don't like. Tough. I've been flamed and you what? I had it coming. I've been on the receiving end of jokes, mostly about the goldens. It's a joke, if it got to pointed I gave it right back. RTF is a wonderful resource for people who are passionate about their dogs, that passion can get heated at times. Making some sub forum for people who get their feelings hurt all the time is ridiculous and reeks of PC hooey.


Very well said, a no from me.


----------



## Cowtown (Oct 3, 2009)

savage25xtreme said:


> What's the name of the forum we are currently posting and responding in? "RTF - Retriever Training Forum"
> 
> I vote we move everything NOT* Retriever Training * somewhere else. Give GDG their own subforum.


I was going to point this out too. Yes folks might want an answer a click away; but after all, they did come to this forum called Retriever Training, signed up an account and posted a question. They are giving an effort.

The reality of newbies is that they do ask questions about things like my dog is dropping my birds on the return retrieve and is FF necessary. When I first started I was a little hung up on the FF because I wasn't educated about it. Once I read a ton, watched training videos and sought advice here on RTF, I quickly became comfortable with it and my dog is now FF'd. Those are the issues you face with a new dog and as a first time trainer.  It's a legit question and problem. 

I, like most newbies, come here for two things: one because I am interested in this sport and want to be around people that share my passion and excitement and two because I want to learn as much about it as possible!

Don't forget you were once there too!

Have a great day everyone, it's Pre-Friday! Taking the day off work tomorrow and will be working with my dog and trainer all day Friday and Saturday....I can't wait!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! We're running our first JH test ever in early May!

Jeff


----------



## mudd (Jul 22, 2010)

I voted no, its not needed and shouldn't be. Post away!


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Make RTF too much more PC-sterile and it's no longer RTF as we know and love it. Kinda feels like the old timers are no longer welcome, let alone appreciated. No "cutesy banter"? Meat dog forum because some don't want to train to a higher standard? Even GDG has lost its tradition. Now when someone asks what it means, they are given the answer. When was the last Jello babe match? Yep, progress, gotta love it.


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Pete said:


> I think the biggest problem with this assumption is that most any question a duck hunter who has little interest in training ,,,, can be answered as follows.
> Stake your dog down so it doesn't break and carry a pocket full of rocks.
> with those two pieces of advice I can have a decent duck dog.
> 
> Pete


Most guys where we hunt have to use a sling shot and a pocket of rocks....have you tried to throw a rock very far in full duck gear? 

black cloud long range shots regards,


----------



## Pete (Dec 24, 2005)

All this talk about newbies being miss treated is making me nauseous.

I can count on 1 hand since I've been frequenting here that that has happened. Its not an epidemic,,,,just a few frustrated grouchy people who got up on the wrong side of the bed that morning.

More newbies have been rude to posters rather than the opposite way around. Also most of their questions can be answered in water dog. The only 2 I can think of off hand that posters were rude to were Jamie and Fred. And thats because the posters were newbies to that particular type of dog training. So there ,,the newbies started it again

Pete


----------



## savage25xtreme (Dec 4, 2009)

Cowtown said:


> I was going to point this out too. Yes folks might want an answer a click away; but after all, they did come to this forum called Retriever Training, signed up an account and posted a question. They are giving an effort.
> 
> The reality of newbies is that they do ask questions about things like my dog is dropping my birds on the return retrieve and is FF necessary. When I first started I was a little hung up on the FF because I wasn't educated about it. Once I read a ton, watched training videos and sought advice here on RTF, I quickly became comfortable with it and my dog is now FF'd. Those are the issues you face with a new dog and as a first time trainer.  It's a legit question and problem.
> 
> ...


Good luck on the JH test, they are a bunch of fun. I enjoy the forum for what it is. I have had my share of flamingz, it is what it is. Honestly if GDG was in one section and training questions where in the other, where would I spend my time? Probably GDG


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

Pete said:


> All this talk about newbies being miss treated is making me nauseous.
> 
> I can count on 1 hand since I've been frequenting here that that has happened. Its not an epidemic,,,,just a few frustrated grouchy people who got up on the wrong side of the bed that morning.
> 
> ...


Wow, do I agree!!!!! Hooray!!!! Now they want a forum for meat dogs even though this is a Retriever _*Training*_ Forum so they aren't told how to train by a program, like you said a tie out and rocks because they just "get along" with their dogs. That's like saying I want to take a French class but just want to speak English. The bottom line is they want to do it their way and then when they don't have results then they want to know what to do about it, but they don't want to follow a program, because they don't have the time or money. Lets get real, most people come here to want to learn how to train their dogs in a sequential method, not haphazard.


----------



## Obabikon (Jul 1, 2009)

ErinsEdge said:


> That's like saying I want to take a French class but just want to speak English.


As I said to Pete a little while ago, I've happily back-pedalled on the meat dog forum idea because who really needs a forum for such simple questions, answers and goals. And like you said, this is a retriever TRAINING forum, after all. *I get it and I agree.*

But your analogy is not quite right. Asking for meat dog training methods on RTF is NOT like taking a French class and asking to speak English.....this is not a class or seminar. It's a public forum.

It's actually like planning a vacation to France and preparing by asking a bunch of your fluent French-speaking friends how to say, hello, goodbye, please, thank you, where's the bathroom, how much does that cost, how do I get to _______, etc. You know.....the basic, practical, useful stuff that will let you hack it on your trip--not actually learn the language.

And when you ask those friends how to say "thank you," you wouldn't expect them fire back asking what instructor they're studying under, or start preaching to you about how to pronouce every letter in the French alphabet, would you???

No. Assuming the person genuinely wants to be nice and helpful (and doesn't have some deep-seeded desire to show everyone how smart they think they are), they'd just say, "Merci."

As a parallel, if a meat-dog-type newbie asks a similarly simple question and only gets "what program are you using" type responses, I have to believe you can understand why they'd get frustrated.



ErinsEdge said:


> Lets get real, most people come here to want to learn how to train their dogs in a sequential method, not haphazard.


Agreed. But ever think this might be because people with those goals are the only people who continue to find this site and its participants useful???

Respectfully,

Ryan


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

PackLeader said:


> Probably nothing.
> 
> Just that a typical hunter who has a $200 shotgun and a mix breed dog that gets out twice a year might not have the means or desire to spend $400 on an e-collar, $300 on training DVDs, and the next 8 months to spend training a dog.
> 
> ...


But those people you refer to have almost no interest in training their dogs beyond taking Fido out with another "meat dog" and letting them learn on the job. Those aren't the people that are going to frequent a board like RTF anyway. And while Chris welcomes all, as it should be, I don't think those people are who the RTF is or should be geared towards.

While there is a very wide gap here between peoples expectations of their dogs, and the time, money and effort they are willing or able to put into them, the fact remains that the large majority of regular posters and readers here do want more than a dog that will chase a rock splashing out in a pond.


----------



## ErinsEdge (Feb 14, 2003)

> As a parallel, if a meat-dog-type newbie asks a similarly simple question and only gets "what program are you using" type responses, I have to believe you can understand why they'd get frustrated.


The reason the question is asked is you can't answer the question without knowing what has been done preceeding the question. For instance, why won't my dog take this cast?, why won't my dog stop on the whistle? or why won't my dog sit when the guns go off but he sits in my back yard? The frustration level is people want a quick answer or quick fix because they are unwilling to follow a program and those that are equipped to answer are not anymore because training takes time and behaviors are proofed by a sequential program. In other words, the responder doesn't know WTH the poster has done with the dog, so how can they answer the question because they aren't psychics.


----------



## jtfreeman (Jan 6, 2009)

Obabikon said:


> As I said to Pete a little while ago, I've happily back-pedalled on the meat dog forum idea because who really needs a forum for such simple questions, answers and goals. And like you said, this is a retriever TRAINING forum, after all. *I get it and I agree.*
> 
> But your analogy is not quite right. Asking for meat dog training methods on RTF is NOT like taking a French class and asking to speak English.....this is not a class or seminar. It's a public forum.
> 
> ...


Ryan,

I think you will find that when people ask basic questions like: how do I get my dog to come when I call or how to I get my dog to understand that SIT means SIT they get straight forward answers that are not "follow a program". It is the questions like "how do I get my dog to leave the line with gusto on a blind" or "my dog has poor marking, how do I improve his doubles" that you get "what program are you following. You get these answers because someone has already figured out how to solve these issues and wrote them down and there are many steps to that process. Steps that depend on the specific dog. Few, if anyone, on this free forum are going to take the time to have daily discussion with a trainer which is what it would require to solve your late basics, transition or advanced issue.

So again, I think you will see that basic questions are answered with an actual solution and more advance questions are anwered with first establishing what program you are following.

And just to re-interate, you can not train a dog one the internet. I don't care who frequents the forum.


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

ErinsEdge said:


> The reason the question is asked is you can't answer the question without knowing what has been done preceeding the question. For instance, why won't my dog take this cast?, why won't my dog stop on the whistle? or why won't my dog sit when the guns go off but he sits in my back yard? The frustration level is people want a quick answer or quick fix because they are unwilling to follow a program and those that are equipped to answer are not anymore because training takes time and behaviors are proofed by a sequential program. In other words, the responder doesn't know WTH the poster has done with the dog, so how can they answer the question because they aren't psychics.


 
Great point Nancy.

Try calling your mechanic and saying "Hey Joe, my truck won't start, what should I do?". Think you're going to get a one sentence answer that will have your truck running like a top?


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

Rainmaker said:


> Kinda feels like the old timers are no longer welcome, let alone appreciated.


..The way I see it, you guys/gals are the _backbone/foundation_ of this whole thing..respectfully,
.......Swamp


----------



## Obabikon (Jul 1, 2009)

All great, vaild points about the "what program are you using" responses. You are absolutely right.

But again, I think it's a symptom of the what I already mentioned: The wide difference in perspective among gun dog owners....and most of you guys and gals are at the extreme, advanced end of the spectrum (That's a compliment ). 

You'll probably disagree with what I'm about to say, but the consensus among average Joe gun-dog owners is that there have been plenty of functional gun dogs (at least "functional" by average Joe standards) produced by non-program, haphazard training "methods." 

I've hunted over several (not mine)...and no, they didn't even need a pocketful of rocks  I'm sure there are millions of bird hunters in this country who'd say the same thing.

These are the same guys who come on here and ask what appear to be "Joe, my truck won't start--what should I do?" type questions.

They're not trying to stir the pot. They don't know the inherent problem advanced folks like all of you see in what they're asking......which is why I suggested the meat dog forum.

If they were asking the same questions to folks on the same wavelength, they wouldn't tick anyone off and would probably get an answer that satisfied them--whether it's accurate, advisable or not....

I guess this group of people--who make up the vast majority of hunter/gun dog owners in this country--should just go somewhere else entirely....

But sincerely, I don't expect, nor would I want this forum to change or have subforums added. It's exactly what it should be for the type of trainers who utilize it most, and it's a great resource.


----------



## Chris Atkinson (Jan 3, 2003)

Rainmaker said:


> Make RTF too much more PC-sterile and it's no longer RTF as we know and love it. Kinda feels like the old timers are no longer welcome, let alone appreciated. No "cutesy banter"? Meat dog forum because some don't want to train to a higher standard? Even GDG has lost its tradition. Now when someone asks what it means, they are given the answer. When was the last Jello babe match? Yep, progress, gotta love it.


 
Some of this concerns me.

If there is anything that I am doing or not doing that is creating a feeling that old timers, whom I agree are the backbone of RTF, are unwelcome, please let me know.

RTF is a big part of who I am and you guys make this resource what it is.

Chris


----------



## Rick_C (Dec 12, 2007)

Obabikon,

I agree with you for the most part. I think the disconnect or hurt feelings come when a newbie asks the "my truck won't start" questions and someone responds with questions (such as are you following a program, what training has the dog had up to now etc...) rather than a one sentence "answer" to their problem. The person asking for help sometimes takes offense to this, thinks the responder is being "elitist" or rude for not answering their question directly, not realizing that the responder is trying to help by getting more background on the situation. 

There is such a wealth of information on this board and many are willing to share their experience and what they have done to correct a problem, but they first want to make sure they fully understand the problem so that they can give the most useful information. Giving a one sentence answer might be more satisfying to the OP but almost all of the time this won't fix the issue and, more likey, might cause more problems without first asking about the background of the dogs training. 

Whether some believe it or not, IMO 99% of the people on RTF want whats best for every dog and want everybody to reach the goals they've set for themselves. If you ask questions and read answers with this in mind, you will get so much more value from RTF then by getting defensive or frustrated.


----------



## Cowtown (Oct 3, 2009)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Some of this concerns me.
> 
> If there is anything that I am doing or not doing that is creating a feeling that old timers, whom I agree are the backbone of RTF, are unwelcome, please let me know.
> 
> ...


As a newbie (and I've voiced my opinion here already) I like RTF just the way it is.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Chris, thank you for the awesome resource and as we all know from the last election (sorry, low hanging fruit), change isn't always for the good.


----------



## Cowtown (Oct 3, 2009)

savage25xtreme said:


> Good luck on the JH test, they are a bunch of fun.


Thanks a ton savage25....I can't tell you how excited I am for this moment.

It's been a long time in the planning since early 2009 when I decided to get a dog, then decided on a retriever, then a Golden, then puppyhood, then a pro trainer and now our first ever hunt test and I will be handling my boy.

It's been an adventure and one that I consider having just begun!

Jeff


----------



## shawninthesticks (Jun 13, 2010)

Just a thought. I'm vary new to retriever world and I sometimes ( well a lot of time's ) I don't understand a lot of the terminology to the sport . I sometimes read a post and have to peace together the story and may not get the hole value. But I am preaty simple


----------



## WRL (Jan 4, 2003)

Chris Atkinson said:


> ...
> 
> RTF is a big part of who I am and you guys make this resource what it is.
> 
> Chris


That's right.....we are two legs and one arm and like any good fungus will be taking over the other arm soon! 

What people don't understand....ESPECIALLY THE NEWBIES.....is that RTF is a FAMILY.....

I am the youngest of seven children.....so let me tell you how BIG FAMILIES operate.

Well when all is going well with the "outside world" its dog eat dog WITHIN the family. When some outsider comes around and CHALLENGES a valued family member, we close ranks and stand united. 

Stick around long enough NEWBIE and you too will be become family....you might be the fugly redheaded stepchild, but family is family! 

WRL


----------



## Rainmaker (Feb 27, 2005)

Chris Atkinson said:


> Some of this concerns me.
> 
> If there is anything that I am doing or not doing that is creating a feeling that old timers, whom I agree are the backbone of RTF, are unwelcome, please let me know.
> 
> ...


Nope, Chris, not you personally. It's all good, old dogs know how to take care of themselves for the most part.


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

You know, I was thinking about this.

This site does not need a subforum for newbies.

It needs a restricted access subforum for Pro's.
I am not being a smart azz here.
I think there are things they may like to discuss without a bunch of stuff not relevant to the topic interspersed.

That way the newbies have access to the knowledge and the Pros have a place to ask other Pros in private.

Just a thought, can't wait for the beating!!!


stan b


----------



## FOM (Jan 17, 2003)

I would ask - what makes a person a Pro? There are way too many "Pros" out there that I wouldn't give two cents for their opinion!


----------



## Swampbilly (May 25, 2010)

road kill said:


> You know, I was thinking about this.
> 
> This site does not need a subforum for newbies.
> 
> ...


Might be mistaken, but thot this site was _already_ equipped for privileged, private, restricted conversation....


----------



## Byron Musick (Sep 19, 2008)

WRL said:


> Stick around long enough NEWBIE and you too will be become family....you might be the fugly redheaded stepchild, but family is family!
> 
> WRL


Only in RTF can one find this level of inspiration and hope!!! 

Wiping the tears from my eye's~~!


----------



## road kill (Feb 15, 2009)

Swampbilly said:


> Might be mistaken, but thot this site was _already_ equipped for privileged, private, restricted conversation....


I don't have your number!!!!











*RK*


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

road kill said:


> You know, I was thinking about this.
> 
> This site does not need a subforum for newbies.
> 
> ...


there is a restricted subforum where RTF matters get discussed by the "cool school club"....FACEBOOK


for the rest of us heathens there is PM, emails, cell phones, texts


----------



## JusticeDog (Jul 3, 2003)

road kill said:


> You know, I was thinking about this.
> 
> This site does not need a subforum for newbies.
> 
> ...


I love ya man, but it's time for that lunch! You do need a beating!  Some pros have FB pages, so they can screen out what they don't want. Or, they have their own websites with and without a blog. I would hate a forum to become another unpaid commercial on RTF. Fair is fair.


----------



## BonMallari (Feb 7, 2008)

JusticeDog said:


> I love ya man, but it's time for that lunch! You do need a beating!  Some pros have FB pages,* so they can screen out what they don't want.* Or, they have their own websites with and without a blog. I would hate a forum to become another unpaid commercial on RTF. Fair is fair.


and the rest of us have the ignore button 

as for beating RK, since you've already stated your intent does that make it pre meditated ....make sure he picks up the check


----------



## RookieTrainer (Mar 11, 2011)

Do a subforum for rookies like myself and set some sort of restriction for visiting. I would choose years of training or maybe dogs trained.

I would then appoint maybe 3 - 5 trainers, *who pretty much agree on a system of training*, to answer the questions. Would require some volunteers, but you are going ot have that no matter which way you try to do this.

An early poster pointed out that much of the information asked for is already available and alluded to the fact that we rookies maybe do nt make adequate use of the search feature. Probably true. But when you already know you don't know what you are talking about, how do you go about deciding where in the thread to get your information?

As an example, you can absolutely count on any question about FF turning into a debate about whether a dog should be FFd. Aside from whether you think the dog should be or not, do you think it is more confusing or less confusing when what seems to be a simple question turns into a debate about whether something that most pro trainers regard as essential should even be done? And where would you start, with little or no background knowledge or experience, to tease out the nuggets in a thread that has devolved into the debate?


----------



## stonybrook (Nov 18, 2005)

Melanie Foster said:


> I voted yes provided this is the format for the subforum. I agree with Susan that more experienced folks would not take the time to visit subforum to answer questions.


I don't know, there are a lot of know-it-alls (self-proclaimed) on here that will go out of their way to find a place to voice their opinion. This would just give them another avenue to make themselves think more highly of themselves.

I voted No.


----------



## Tom Mouer (Aug 26, 2003)

I would think that instead of "instant answers" from unknown sources (knowledgable and rank beginners) posting answers to some very technical questions, the subforum would include a bibliographical reference library, so that users would be able to read and gain an appreciation for the history and traditions and, YES, training methods that have evolved since the Harrimans', Whitneys''. et al imported trainers from England in order to play the "Retrievr games."
Or, those that answer questions on the forum list a reference source when it is appropriate.
I have read some really "goofy" advice given here' over the years, but those advisors usually "self destruct" over time.
I voted "other"


----------



## spwz99 (Oct 7, 2011)

I'm voting yes for this reason: Yes, there is a search feature and yes it's very easy to use, but being a newbie, you don't always know what to search for. Sometimes you have to ask a very vague question in order to get an answer that tells you what you need to be searching for.

Just my $.02


----------



## Bayou Magic (Feb 7, 2004)

Chris Atkinson said:


> I agree with your point completely Susan, which is exactly why I've been avoiding a subforum.
> 
> I'm just seeking some group opinion.
> 
> ...


Chris, if you don't mind, I'm going to steal your diplomatic phrase "behavioral adjustment". It will be equally handy at work and when training the pups!

fp


----------



## Travis Schneider (Aug 31, 2010)

JusticeDog said:


> Great idea... I but I said "no" - what experiened person will visit regularly to answer the questions? Seems all the sub-forums are less used...


I did vote yes...because i am a rookie myself and could use all the help i can get, but i also thought of this very thing whenever i clicked the "yes" button. That was my only concern.


----------

