So are we LIMA or are we “bALaNceD”?

[tenderloin]

@autumn1123 Hmmm I see a lot of comments about "I used an e-collar and it was like I had a different dog in a week!" and then discussions about the fallout of aversives, which is incredibly helpful for a newbie. Again, I would much rather someone have all of that information than finding it elsewhere without that nuance. There are thousands of places on the internet to find one-sided dog training advice and very few where we can have that kind of discussion.

 

[autumn1123]

@tenderloin I feel like it would be more helpful to have searchable threads of or be able to ask, “I’m at the end of my rope and want to get an e-collar, thoughts?” And have the overwhelming response be about the potential fallout, than a confusing mixture and back-and-forth. Plus, there’s always the risk of comments falling through the cracks when no one is around to call out bad information.

 

[christopherb]

@imagebeastmarkbeast They're banning this sub because it's not against aversives enough. Even though it's entirely against them, exactly as much as the other subs.

 

[aspiegrace]

@luketbachelder

Many other subs are starting to ban mentions of r/reactivedogs because of the rules and treatment regarding aversives here.

First I've heard of that. Which subs?

 

[christopherb]

@aspiegrace Dogs, Dogtraining, and puppy101.

 

[eront]

@christopherb As a note, puppy101 does not remove mentions of r/reactivedogs on our sub.

I have removed one and only because the person also added that they weren't allowed to promote aversive tools on puppy but could on reactivedogs.

 

[tiernon]

@eront That's good to know

 

[tenderloin]

@christopherb Huh, an r/dogs "ban" (whatever that even means) seems super hypocritical, considering they have the same stance: https://www.reddit.com/r/dogs/wiki/index#wiki_least_intrusive.2C_minimally_aversive_.28lima.29

 

[eront]

@tenderloin They enforce it by removing recommendations of aversive equipment.

 

[tenderloin]

@eront I meant a "ban" on mentioning this sub.

 

[joshuawithmartin]

@christopherb ooh r/dogs is an interesting one given they have quite a similar stance and many more of those users over there use tools I think.

 

[christopherb]

@joshuawithmartin I gather that the overlapping mods essentially made that decision, not that their mod team independently decided to join the boycott. Those three subreddits have a high degree of mod overlap so a handful of mods effectively control all three.

Edit: I forgot one user with a high degree of overlap isn't a mod of multiple after all.

 

[autumn1123]

@christopherb Um? There's one mod for r/puppy101 who is also a mod for r/dogs and I don't even know if they're active. That's it. That's the extent of the overlap.

 

[christopherb]

@autumn1123 I forgot @eront doesn't overlap as well since they comment so much on r/Dogtraining and are a distinguished user. @seek2bboldwitness is definitely active on both, they're the one who crashed and burned the disastrous April Fool's "prank" on r/dogs. You "don't know if they're active" when their most recent posts are mod posts on both subs? Takes two seconds to check.

I don't believe that there's no influence between the subs from the overlapping mods, though.

 

[eront]

@christopherb But, our policies between puppy101 and dogs aren't the same.

We literally don't remove the comments on r/puppy101 unless the user is specifically referring discussion to recommend aversive equipment.

 

[christopherb]

@eront I'm confused because @gdssldier, a mod of r/Dogtraining, is publicly saying you guys agreed to be part of this whole thing:

https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/upkc2z/a_user_asks_for_advice_in_dealing_with_their

This makes it sound like you aligned on a decision and are all taking the same stance.

So you're saying you're not "actively unlinking" after all?

 

[eront]

@christopherb We have a bot that lets people know that there are recommendations that violate our rules and that we still see it as a valuable resource. We've also been working our own reactivity resources to compensate. That is based on our team's consensus. Our shared mod has literally nothing to do with this.

So, not totally prohibiting, but aiming to create an alternative for puppies seeing it is a very common topic.

 

[christopherb]

@eront I already addressed that I was misremembering about the shared mod situation. The biggest hardass most firm stance-taker in this situation doesn't overlap at all, after all.

I feel like the Dogtraining mod is misrepresenting how unified this is, then...it makes it seem like this sub is some aversive cesspool that three prominent dog subs decided to "actively unlink" it. In reality, the mods just have different philosophies on what the most effective way to reach aversive-users and coax them into force-free is. This place isn't OpenDogTraining.

This feels ridiculous and dramatic, and does not feel like the welfare of dogs is the priority here.

 

[aaa]

@christopherb As a mod for one of them, I can tell you that I have zero influence on the other two, nor do any of their mods influence our decisions at all (obviously aside from the one mod who overlaps, but that's one vote, not a dictatorship). We can and often do agree with decisions other subs have taken, of course.