This is a placeholder text
Group text
by OGBS on 17 September 2010 - 18:09
Momo,
My organization operates within itself.
We are not seeking funds from corporations.
If you knew anything about donations offered by corporations, or charitable foundations, you would know that they fund projects, not operating expenses.
Donations to all charities have been way down since the terrorist attacks in 2001. This isn't a secret.
Rescues are 501(c)3, not 403(b)
As for getting over myself, I didn't know that I was under myself.
I don't have a "cause".
I have a rescue organization that rescues cats and dogs and places them in appropriate homes with the hope that this will be their permanent home. Most of the time it is, but, occasionally we do get them back.
My organization operates within itself.
We are not seeking funds from corporations.
If you knew anything about donations offered by corporations, or charitable foundations, you would know that they fund projects, not operating expenses.
Donations to all charities have been way down since the terrorist attacks in 2001. This isn't a secret.
Rescues are 501(c)3, not 403(b)
As for getting over myself, I didn't know that I was under myself.
I don't have a "cause".
I have a rescue organization that rescues cats and dogs and places them in appropriate homes with the hope that this will be their permanent home. Most of the time it is, but, occasionally we do get them back.
by OGBS on 17 September 2010 - 18:09
The word is "adjudicate".
Damages are not adjudicated. They are awarded.
Disputes are adjudicated.
To answer your question, it depends on how the contract is written and what the law provides for.
As for the landlord, only in a state like California would a landlord be responsible for a renter's dog biting someone.
(Is this actually the law, or, are you on a fishing expedition looking for something that isn't there?)
Damages are not adjudicated. They are awarded.
Disputes are adjudicated.
To answer your question, it depends on how the contract is written and what the law provides for.
As for the landlord, only in a state like California would a landlord be responsible for a renter's dog biting someone.
(Is this actually the law, or, are you on a fishing expedition looking for something that isn't there?)
by OGBS on 17 September 2010 - 18:09
By the way, I really do think that you are DDR-DSH!
by momosgarage on 17 September 2010 - 21:09
OGBS, all your posts are doing is confirming that rescues are flying by the seat of thier pants. No wonder the adoption contracts are ridiculous.
Rescues are 501(c)3, not 403(b)
Fair enough. My mistake, doing two things at once.
Disputes are adjudicated
Once again read my earlier posts. This is the second time you have not properly referenced my posts. I guess you missed it when I said "arbitration" earlier in the thread, not everything goes to court.
If you knew anything about donations offered by corporations, or charitable foundations, you would know that they fund projects, not operating expenses.
I never said large fortune 500 style companies only. Yes they give money that way when you deal with thier various charitable arms. If you think thats all corporations and private companies are donating in terms of "giving" then you seem to know less about it than I do. If operating expenses were not a part of charitable projects none would ever be started or finished. You mean, YOUR long term business plans has no formal "projects" to present when looking for funding. You don't have any private doners that give funding or supplies for operating expenses? I did mention those too, but like I said you CHOOSE NOT TO READ AND REFERENCE EARLIER POSTS. You're in bigger trouble than I thought. How do you solicit funding from any source if you can't whip up something for your long term plans or have something ready to explain your cause in the form of a project or proposal? Once again not what the thread is about, so lets go back to where this thread started.
Rescues are 501(c)3, not 403(b)
Fair enough. My mistake, doing two things at once.
Disputes are adjudicated
Once again read my earlier posts. This is the second time you have not properly referenced my posts. I guess you missed it when I said "arbitration" earlier in the thread, not everything goes to court.
If you knew anything about donations offered by corporations, or charitable foundations, you would know that they fund projects, not operating expenses.
I never said large fortune 500 style companies only. Yes they give money that way when you deal with thier various charitable arms. If you think thats all corporations and private companies are donating in terms of "giving" then you seem to know less about it than I do. If operating expenses were not a part of charitable projects none would ever be started or finished. You mean, YOUR long term business plans has no formal "projects" to present when looking for funding. You don't have any private doners that give funding or supplies for operating expenses? I did mention those too, but like I said you CHOOSE NOT TO READ AND REFERENCE EARLIER POSTS. You're in bigger trouble than I thought. How do you solicit funding from any source if you can't whip up something for your long term plans or have something ready to explain your cause in the form of a project or proposal? Once again not what the thread is about, so lets go back to where this thread started.
by OGBS on 17 September 2010 - 22:09
Why would I need to go back and read your earlier ridiculous posts when I am responding to the one just above what I wrote?
Why do you need to go back to your earlier ridiculous posts to try to dig yourself out of the rubble coming down around you?
My rescue isn't in trouble. Just as many, many others aren't.
It is doing great without you and your un-educated rants.
Why don't you go in to the real reason that you started this topic?
It probably goes something like this: You have been turned away by so many rescues that you now have a personal vendetta against them under the guise of "trying to show them a better way"!
***Edited by Moderator. Stick to facts, please. A legal case is a published fact, calling people names is not. Accusing one poster of being another without proof is also not a fact. Don't do it. ***
Why do you need to go back to your earlier ridiculous posts to try to dig yourself out of the rubble coming down around you?
My rescue isn't in trouble. Just as many, many others aren't.
It is doing great without you and your un-educated rants.
Why don't you go in to the real reason that you started this topic?
It probably goes something like this: You have been turned away by so many rescues that you now have a personal vendetta against them under the guise of "trying to show them a better way"!
***Edited by Moderator. Stick to facts, please. A legal case is a published fact, calling people names is not. Accusing one poster of being another without proof is also not a fact. Don't do it. ***
by VomMarischal on 17 September 2010 - 22:09
Sure sounds like DDR-DSH to ME.
--Jackie
http://workingk9.lefora.com/
--Jackie
http://workingk9.lefora.com/
by momosgarage on 18 September 2010 - 02:09
Why would I need to go back and read your earlier ridiculous posts when I am responding to the one just above what I wrote?
I have been consistant in my points. I am not going to list them for you, but its obvious that you can't follow a chain of discussion points. I thinks its hilarious that some of you are accusing me of being "DDR-DSH to ME". Who or whatever that is I don't know. No I haven't been denied by a dozen rescues. I have visited 5. 3 were to volunteer because they are near the house and two others to investigate the adoption process. One had some strange application process and I didn't like it so I withdrew. I thought I would come on the board for some "expert" opinions, but I got about 3 in this whole thread. I guess people on here know less than I assumed. I guess I am done here, I'll just call my lawyer to do some research. I would say its been fun, but its been more enlightening about "what" rather than "who" is out there running the rescues.
End conclusion, "Looney Toons" are running rescues, but there are still some doing good out there. I just don't think it will be worth the effort to find out who they are. After getting some ideas from this thread, I realized that the rescues are out of touch. You can't save many dogs if the people you turn away go out and get another one anyway, your are just wasting thier time and your own time in the "name" of "doing good" rather than actually doing good. Also since this thread will be searchable for some time on the web, I hope others view it and walk away from the rescue scene too. They will "lurk" the boards, read the stories and vote with thier feet. The rescues just won't notice nobody cares until its too late. I think regular people will have the sense to say "screw it, keep your dogs". Some of you may not like that statement, but actions speak louder than words and regular folks are already saying this. It will only get worse for the rescues over time.
Here is a link I posted earlier outlining the frustrations of regular people. These frustrations are real and rescues are doing NOTHING to educate the public about why these contradictory practices are nesassary. Thier lack of action to educate people leaves me with no sympathy for thier causes or frustrations. Attention Rescues!! read the comments, the villagers are gathering thier pitchforks. This is the view from the street, the common man, don't turn regular folk against your cause:
http://blog.timesunion.com/mydogbandit/do-some-rescues-make-it-too-difficult-to-adopt/968/
I have been consistant in my points. I am not going to list them for you, but its obvious that you can't follow a chain of discussion points. I thinks its hilarious that some of you are accusing me of being "DDR-DSH to ME". Who or whatever that is I don't know. No I haven't been denied by a dozen rescues. I have visited 5. 3 were to volunteer because they are near the house and two others to investigate the adoption process. One had some strange application process and I didn't like it so I withdrew. I thought I would come on the board for some "expert" opinions, but I got about 3 in this whole thread. I guess people on here know less than I assumed. I guess I am done here, I'll just call my lawyer to do some research. I would say its been fun, but its been more enlightening about "what" rather than "who" is out there running the rescues.
End conclusion, "Looney Toons" are running rescues, but there are still some doing good out there. I just don't think it will be worth the effort to find out who they are. After getting some ideas from this thread, I realized that the rescues are out of touch. You can't save many dogs if the people you turn away go out and get another one anyway, your are just wasting thier time and your own time in the "name" of "doing good" rather than actually doing good. Also since this thread will be searchable for some time on the web, I hope others view it and walk away from the rescue scene too. They will "lurk" the boards, read the stories and vote with thier feet. The rescues just won't notice nobody cares until its too late. I think regular people will have the sense to say "screw it, keep your dogs". Some of you may not like that statement, but actions speak louder than words and regular folks are already saying this. It will only get worse for the rescues over time.
Here is a link I posted earlier outlining the frustrations of regular people. These frustrations are real and rescues are doing NOTHING to educate the public about why these contradictory practices are nesassary. Thier lack of action to educate people leaves me with no sympathy for thier causes or frustrations. Attention Rescues!! read the comments, the villagers are gathering thier pitchforks. This is the view from the street, the common man, don't turn regular folk against your cause:
http://blog.timesunion.com/mydogbandit/do-some-rescues-make-it-too-difficult-to-adopt/968/
by Doberdoodle on 18 September 2010 - 03:09
Momos- you seem to assume a lot of things.
"Then I guess the dogs can stay in the rescue their entire life, I'd rather they be euthanized like in the old days... If you want to promote the "storage" of unwanted dogs while collecting donations under tax exempt status then you are part of the problem that exists with many legitimate rescues."
Uh, that's what I was saying, is that they should euthanize dogs if they have to make those tough decisions where needed, in order to NOT warehouse them. I know several breed rescues that have WAITING LISTS. Golden Rescue, Boxer Rescue, English Bulldog rescue, they all have waiting lists that I know of. Because you will wait to be matched with the right dog, and because they have a reputation for doing things properly. You don't just choose a photo and go pick up the dog, they match YOU up with potential dogs before you can even see them, based on your application. That is the right way. Not just "Oh look at that one, it has a cute face, sign the paper, pay $120 and take it home." They need to be educated on the breed and assessed for what type of owner they are. Passive owner personality? Experienced owner? Firm handler? Busy hectic household? Kids? Social visitors often? City living or a suburban sprawl? These are some of the things that matter.
And for the girl with the American Bulldog I mentioned, no she should not have gotten one and then learned about the breed. Why wait until your dog is unmanagable and dangerous to other dogs before you go "learning" about the breed. They had no idea what an AB was, they hear Bulldog they think English Bulldog, they have no idea the drive the dog has or what "drive" is. Everyone would take a cute 8-week old puppy, knowing nothing about the breed at all. Part of this is the fault of the rescues and shelters. The owners struggle, the dogs struggle. A lot of them are brought in from high-kill shelters in rural areas. They want to go there because they feel like they're a savior. Doesn't even matter the breed, if someone says its on "death row" all of the sudden anyone will take it, even those who are unprepared to own certain dogs. They think with emotions and not with their brains. Good rescues don't do these emotional ploys of "He only has 3 days to live, someone plz take him!!!!!" And seriously, if a dog bites someone, it can't just be adopted out, but some rescue ppl either cover it up or alibi it with "oh he's been through trauma" or "the person moved their hand too fast, so it scared the dog" and they give them to someone as a "project," to work on. Not everyone is equipped to handle a "project" dog, and what happens is they get bounced around! They get returned. And once they've spent thousands on vetting a dog and surgeries, then it bites someone, guess who is reluctant to PTS, because then donors will say it's not a no-kill and will withdraw support. Nobody wants to face the reality that there's not enough homes for every single dog and that until people stop irresponsibly breeding, some will have to be put down. And if someone was denied by a rescue, there's probably a great reason why. They may go to a pet shop or somewhere else, but the rescues 1st priority is not "satisfying customers", it's their dogs they are looking out for.
"Then I guess the dogs can stay in the rescue their entire life, I'd rather they be euthanized like in the old days... If you want to promote the "storage" of unwanted dogs while collecting donations under tax exempt status then you are part of the problem that exists with many legitimate rescues."
Uh, that's what I was saying, is that they should euthanize dogs if they have to make those tough decisions where needed, in order to NOT warehouse them. I know several breed rescues that have WAITING LISTS. Golden Rescue, Boxer Rescue, English Bulldog rescue, they all have waiting lists that I know of. Because you will wait to be matched with the right dog, and because they have a reputation for doing things properly. You don't just choose a photo and go pick up the dog, they match YOU up with potential dogs before you can even see them, based on your application. That is the right way. Not just "Oh look at that one, it has a cute face, sign the paper, pay $120 and take it home." They need to be educated on the breed and assessed for what type of owner they are. Passive owner personality? Experienced owner? Firm handler? Busy hectic household? Kids? Social visitors often? City living or a suburban sprawl? These are some of the things that matter.
And for the girl with the American Bulldog I mentioned, no she should not have gotten one and then learned about the breed. Why wait until your dog is unmanagable and dangerous to other dogs before you go "learning" about the breed. They had no idea what an AB was, they hear Bulldog they think English Bulldog, they have no idea the drive the dog has or what "drive" is. Everyone would take a cute 8-week old puppy, knowing nothing about the breed at all. Part of this is the fault of the rescues and shelters. The owners struggle, the dogs struggle. A lot of them are brought in from high-kill shelters in rural areas. They want to go there because they feel like they're a savior. Doesn't even matter the breed, if someone says its on "death row" all of the sudden anyone will take it, even those who are unprepared to own certain dogs. They think with emotions and not with their brains. Good rescues don't do these emotional ploys of "He only has 3 days to live, someone plz take him!!!!!" And seriously, if a dog bites someone, it can't just be adopted out, but some rescue ppl either cover it up or alibi it with "oh he's been through trauma" or "the person moved their hand too fast, so it scared the dog" and they give them to someone as a "project," to work on. Not everyone is equipped to handle a "project" dog, and what happens is they get bounced around! They get returned. And once they've spent thousands on vetting a dog and surgeries, then it bites someone, guess who is reluctant to PTS, because then donors will say it's not a no-kill and will withdraw support. Nobody wants to face the reality that there's not enough homes for every single dog and that until people stop irresponsibly breeding, some will have to be put down. And if someone was denied by a rescue, there's probably a great reason why. They may go to a pet shop or somewhere else, but the rescues 1st priority is not "satisfying customers", it's their dogs they are looking out for.
by Krazy Bout K9s on 18 September 2010 - 04:09
Well Said Doberdoodle...I am sorry but Momo-whatever is just looking for a good fight...he/she is an idiot...
I have tried to stay out of this one, but stupidity won, I can't stay quiet any longer, DARN !!!!
We/the Rescues are looking out for the dogs...end of story...and there are a ton of DNA (Do Not Adopt) to people out there, that "think" they are smart enough to own a GSD or Malinois...
We don't "storage" dogs, they move in and out very fast...usually within a week or two of getting them in.
We fit the dog to the people...yeh we make mistakes, but NOT VERY OFTEN!!!
Steph
I have tried to stay out of this one, but stupidity won, I can't stay quiet any longer, DARN !!!!
We/the Rescues are looking out for the dogs...end of story...and there are a ton of DNA (Do Not Adopt) to people out there, that "think" they are smart enough to own a GSD or Malinois...
We don't "storage" dogs, they move in and out very fast...usually within a week or two of getting them in.
We fit the dog to the people...yeh we make mistakes, but NOT VERY OFTEN!!!
Steph
by Doberdoodle on 18 September 2010 - 04:09
Even just taking basic applications can be revealing, I used to be dumbfounded when I got apps. Where will the dog live? "In the garage." Why are you interested in getting a dog at this time? "To replace my last dog who ran away." "Can I have her but un spayded?" Uhhh, DNA!!!
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top