1 2 3 4 5 6
on 02Feb 2004: LOL I have to agree. Both are worthless. Cheryl Trapped like rats. In a chia-pet. MIB II

I wouldn't agree with either statement. I don't read much of Gaubster soI cannot comment on him,

He tends to drive me a little nuts. Not at first, but as time wore on. I'm at the point where I often don't read his posts & just sort of generally discount them.
but I do find Steve Crane to be honest and knowledgeable. There is very much a dichotomy here with much animosity between the two groups.

This I agree with. Yep, & yep.
I value information from both but I do wish the people involved were more respectful towards each other. I sometimeswonder ... I've said. I'd hate to think that someone (even a stranger) might always associate me with some of mynastier posts.

I must've missed those posts. Or else they were benign compared w/ others! I, for one, just do not associate nastily worded posts w/ you!

Well, there is one person (whom I will not name, though this person
is an idiot that's a big hint!) that could think I'm evil incarnate and I wouldn't give a rat's ass.

On Usenet, there usually is at least one exception in this regard - one comes across a really wide spectrum of people. ;-)

Cathy

"Staccato signals of constant information..."
("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon
circa Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:35:37 -0600, in rec.pets.cats.health+behav, Rona Yuthasastrakosol (Email Removed) said,
I wouldn't agree with either statement. I don't read much of Gaubster so I cannot comment on him, but I ... person is an idiot that's a big hint!) that could think I'm evil incarnate and I wouldn't give a rat's ass.

You put voice to my thoughts perfectly, Rona, although I have killfiled Gaubster as I just found him to be an ass and a waste of bandwidth. As for Tinfoil Tunahead, a.k.a. wingnut, a.k.a. CP, I don't think he's capable of drawing any sort of conclusion, logical or otherwise, so he's just vaguely entertaining.
I've stopped reading the posts in this thread from the two battling groups. I just happened to notice your post and read it because you'd not been part of the flame war. At this point, folks are really just arguing with each other and there's not an actual dialog occurring, so I just move on.
Laura

I am Dyslexia of Borg,
Your ass will be laminated.
OK I think I understand what you are saying - were suggestions better or worse than Special Kitty brand pet food?

Yes, thank you. It seemed to me that in view of what the OP was feeding, many foods would constitute an improvement including the ones Lauren recommended.

Unfortunately I cannot remember why
the OP was using that food in the first place,

Cost.
nor am I familiar with the
brand. If the OP meant Purina Special Care Kitten,

No, it's Walmart's private label cat food. It would be interesting to find out who makes it, but I haven't seen that info anywhere.

then I can comment on
that food as I have analyticals for that food. That still does not negate nor disqualify comments about the foods that were recommended. It does in no way imply that comments about any food offered for any purpose are not fair game for commentary.

Sure, but it's also fair to ask that such comments be placed in the appropriate context. Otherwise the commentary can be misleading.
The issue here is one of probity and maturity. If you venture an opinion you should be prepared to support ... instead to revert to name calling and personal attacks, none of which provides valuable information to readers on this NG.

While you and Gaubster appear to be fascinated with who said what about whom in these food-related threads, and who ought to apologize to whom, you should realize that for the rest of us it's not of any real interest. So yes, you are right, none of that provides valuable information.
I wouldn't agree with either statement. I don't read much of Gaubster so I cannot comment on him, but I ... between the two groups has to become an insult-match with whomever hurling the most hurtful insults feeling like they've won.

Thank-you Rona,I think conflicts are inevitable. Whatever I post here is based upon the hard core science of nutrition. I often annotate what I post here with sources when requested. I enjoy debate on issues. We all learn in the process. I kind of have to snicker a bit. I spend my days with a bunch of board certified diplomates of internal medicine, dermatology, and nutrition. At those levels the debates are nearly as raucous. I think it becomes an "insult" match when one side finds the facts to be counter to thier expressed opinions and they are unable to find any data to support the opinions they have developed.

Once the argument has been lost, name calling becomes the "argument" of choice. It's usually a clear signal someone has lost the debate badly. One thing I do recognize is that there are a lot of "lurkers" on this NG. I get emails from folks like that several times a week with questions about one thing or another.