This is a placeholder text
Group text
by Blitzen on 08 May 2013 - 13:05
IMO this board is good for calling attention to possible problematic situations in the GSD world.
by Hundmutter on 08 May 2013 - 13:05
I have not disregarded what has been said about Jeffers' 'performance'
these days being all good; just pointing out that some people would
obviously feel happier about trusting him now if they had it confirmed
that he'd regretted / made up for what he'd done then.
As you know, Gustav, I take everything everyone says with a pinch
of salt, that does not mean I cannot see a value in someone who is
getting a second chance being up front with what they did in the
past. Whatever the degree of truth in what was reported - like I said, no
one has come up with any info. that actually disproves what he was
accused of then; which isn't the same as claiming anyone can prove he
would do the same again now. Show me where I said he was bound to
do it again ? [As you also know from another topic / thred, I do not myself
object to people being GIVEN '2nd chances', per se.]
Others have pointed out that there is both a recognised route, and a duty, to
tell the Clubs if you have pertinent info (good OR bad) on nominees; but
instead of encouraging people to use that and simply tell the truth as they
know it, the 'cheer squad' on here goes on the defensive to try to use that
system and this thread to flood the GSD world with 'pro' comments to the
extent that they want to ignore - and feel everybody else should ignore - any
concerns, even if there still is a possibility there may be similar problems
in the future. Cory whatshisface had a good reputation prior to his training
and boarding operation going all downhill, yes ?
And no your comparison doesn't work because we are not talking about
Jeffers competing, we are talking about him representing the breed in
competition. Subtle difference. I was worried about letting my hypothetical
nanny take my child places by car, whatever the original source of the info
about his/her past. Hinges on the Duty of Care angle, not who gets worlds
greatest nanny crown. The person may be fine feeding and cleaning up after
the kid; doesn't mean they will also automatically be fine taking them to
a birthday party.
You even say YOU ' would want to know ' ... how does anyone get to 'know'
someone is a reformed character if there is no demonstration of regret, and
commitments are left outstanding ? Just by what you see them do today ?
So no one can ever pull the wool over your eyes by having outstanding debts
they don't tell you about ...
these days being all good; just pointing out that some people would
obviously feel happier about trusting him now if they had it confirmed
that he'd regretted / made up for what he'd done then.
As you know, Gustav, I take everything everyone says with a pinch
of salt, that does not mean I cannot see a value in someone who is
getting a second chance being up front with what they did in the
past. Whatever the degree of truth in what was reported - like I said, no
one has come up with any info. that actually disproves what he was
accused of then; which isn't the same as claiming anyone can prove he
would do the same again now. Show me where I said he was bound to
do it again ? [As you also know from another topic / thred, I do not myself
object to people being GIVEN '2nd chances', per se.]
Others have pointed out that there is both a recognised route, and a duty, to
tell the Clubs if you have pertinent info (good OR bad) on nominees; but
instead of encouraging people to use that and simply tell the truth as they
know it, the 'cheer squad' on here goes on the defensive to try to use that
system and this thread to flood the GSD world with 'pro' comments to the
extent that they want to ignore - and feel everybody else should ignore - any
concerns, even if there still is a possibility there may be similar problems
in the future. Cory whatshisface had a good reputation prior to his training
and boarding operation going all downhill, yes ?
And no your comparison doesn't work because we are not talking about
Jeffers competing, we are talking about him representing the breed in
competition. Subtle difference. I was worried about letting my hypothetical
nanny take my child places by car, whatever the original source of the info
about his/her past. Hinges on the Duty of Care angle, not who gets worlds
greatest nanny crown. The person may be fine feeding and cleaning up after
the kid; doesn't mean they will also automatically be fine taking them to
a birthday party.
You even say YOU ' would want to know ' ... how does anyone get to 'know'
someone is a reformed character if there is no demonstration of regret, and
commitments are left outstanding ? Just by what you see them do today ?
So no one can ever pull the wool over your eyes by having outstanding debts
they don't tell you about ...
by Blitzen on 08 May 2013 - 14:05
I'm going to guess that the WDA and the GSDCA will only want to hear from those who have had personal experiences with Mr. Jeffers. It's not a matter of whether or not he has seen the light, rather the concern is what,if anything, he has done in the past that resulted in related charges and convictions and how he conducts himself now.
Contact information Disclaimer Privacy Statement Copyright Information Terms of Service Cookie policy ↑ Back to top