[FlDebra]

Originally Posted by Wylie's Mom

A. … I didn't twist your words …I think what you seem to be so angry about is the way *I* (and others) intrepreted what was typed. And that was (and is) my interpretation, not yours.

B. …That said, there are plenty of posts here where people mention 'yelling', and address it right there on the thread. It's not new. Also, it's been in the YT Rules for years now.

C. …. Because you 'took it' one way, does not mean it's the right way, the wrong way, or the only way. .

D. … So no, I'm sitting here 'thinking' ..."hmmmm, self, I wonder if any members want to call anyone a sucker". I didn't have to think it, Debra, it was stated by another member.

E. …I don't view what was said yesterday as OT or silly, since the comments made were about partis - and that is the topic here.

F. the 'twisting words' or whatever - that is starting to seem like a control issue. So, I'll repeat this -- members can and *will* interpret things according to their own experience. YOU may view it as an altered meaning, incorrect, or off topic, etcetera - but please don't presume that the way you view things should be shared by everyone.

G. Please stop informing the members that they're simply wrong in what they interpret - it's their interpretation!

A. I’m not angry, sometimes frustrated, not angry. Never said YOU twisted MY words. Others have. I've also had comments made by others attributed to me & had my words erroneously interpreted. (When we talk about interpretation of my own posts, I do feel I’m in a better position to know what was intended). Sorry if you feel it is a "control issue" to want words to correctly reflect what I have said, meant or interpreted. It is important to me.

Examples of twisting my words (1) the OFA/CERF certifications and the issue of "color not being selective in parti's -- which was wrongly interpreted to mean I thought parti-breeders were not at all selective. I referred to OFA/CERF certifications and was answered with info that only applied to the CHIC listing. and (2) Since I was told by parti-breeders that any 2-3 colors, any markings, any percentages as long as white is included was accepted, I felt that was not selective in color goal. In fact my actual quote was: "For Parti's it seems that "anything goes" as long as the dog has white on it. That does not seem like very selective." and "I was speaking solely on the subject of color when I said parti's were not selective, that was clear."

B.&D Capitalization. Never said I didn’t know about it or that it was new. Explained my use of the caps was for emphasis & pointed out that I thought only entire posts in caps was against the rules, but since it is again brought up, I will quote the actual rule from YT GUIDELINES: "RULE: 3. PLEASE do not use ALL CAPITAL LETTERS when you post a reply or a new thread. All caps symbolizes shouting and while it can be used for emphasis, usually messages with entirely all capital letters are frowned upon." I think I have used them as emphasis & have not made any posts entirely with caps & thus have not broken the rules. Ironically, the post drawing criticism, included a heading in all caps meant to draw immediate attention, trying to put an end to you or anyone else thinking someone’s post meant all parti owners were suckers. I said it with emphasis to try to prevent more hurt feelings & instead it is now being used as something else I did wrong?

D. To continue about the “sucker” comment, when I tried to explain how I took it, I even made sure to say I did not think it right for standard yorkies to cost that much either ($6000 was amount mentioned in one). I did make sure to say "I took that to only refer to those paying exorbitant prices and not all of the parti owners." --and --"I do not think anyone would have tried to intimate that every one of our parti-owners was a sucker! " -- See, I used words like "I took that to only refer.." and "I do not think..." specifically showing these were my feelings/thoughts/opinions. I think I went out of my way to ensure I was relating my feelings & not saying yours were wrong. If you can interpret, can I not interpret also, even tho in a different direction?

C.E.F.G. I haven’t told you your interpretations are wrong. I have disagreed with them. The only things I have said were wrong in this thread are: incorrect information written about vestigial tails (I provided reference);and Breezeways comments about YTCA putting more importance on color than health and that it was said that parti-breeders were bad people. Since I felt I had substantial FACTS to dispute all 3, I do not feel they are disputing anyones interpretations. In all other instances I was very careful to say "I think, I believe, My opinion, etc..." a habit which was not followed by some others.

I never told anyone not to post. Originally, I asked that we put together a thread of references w/o opinions so we could ask they be put in as a permanent "sticky." That didn't work after a few days & opinions flew from all sides. Merely disagreeing with an opinion or stating one contrary to another is NOT usurping anyone's rights to their own perceptions. You wrote: "Please stop informing the members that they're simply wrong in what they interpret - it's their interpretation!" Where have I told anyone they are "simply wrong" in their interpretation? I did disagree with your interpretation of anyone calling you a sucker. I did not say you were wrong to have feelings. In fact, I said if you do feel that way I am sorry. I really am sorry you would feel people on this forum who have shown you the utmost respect and admiration would now insult you.

I wrote things like:
"Everyone is welcome to post their references pro and con."
"I like reading both sides of the coin when REAL information is presented, historically and scientifically correct. " and
"I am looking forward to more references as time passes. It would be great to have all available references in one location (at least links). ..Thank you all!!!"

...because I truly wanted an all-sided discussion on the Parti-colors. I thanked Breezeway specifically for going to the extra work of providing us with quotes, letters, & links that discussed the "white" color. One comment I wrote to her said, ": I appreciate the links, information and opinions you have provided in a most professional manner. Hope your Christmas was full of love, laughter & family!" so I do not understand your interpretation that I have somehow stopped anyone from giving their "interpretation."

E. I know I cannot nor would I want to dictate what is written. I did hope we could get the reference-laden thread this started out to be, to save for posterity. I really appreciate those that provided so many references & specific opinions based on experience. Unfortunately that sort of deteriorated after a few days, & I no longer asked for "no opinions" & let it go. I did think some of the "off topic" posts were unwarranted & against the YT rules (#5: Keep posts on topic and post threads in the appropriate section.). You wrote: "I don't view what was said yesterday as OT or silly, since the comments made were about partis - and that is the topic here." If they were about partis,then I would not have been referring to them as off topic. Purposely littering a thread with off-topic posts is frustrating & unnecessary IMO & IS against the rules posted here. (i.e. wrapping dogs???? vestigial tails??? I don't think either of those helped the course of this thread).

It is difficult to answer your post when you are basically responding as both a parti-owner/YT member & as moderator. You have admonished me for the CAPS issue & told me to stop telling members they are wrong for their interpretations -- both decidedly moderator-implied duties. I feel the CAPS issue was not warranted as I didn’t make entire posts in caps & DID only use them as emphasis. I have to wonder if you would have addressed these topics as moderator if it were not a Parti-thread. I feel like you have wielded your moderator authority with extreme fairness and impartiality overall. But I think this is a conflict of interest making it difficult to completely step out of either role.

I cannot see where I have told any member they are wrong for their interpretations. I have disagreed. I have written different interpretations. I suppose it’s human nature to think our own perceptions are fine and others' are somehow telling us we are wrong. But I have not tried to stop you or anyone from having your own interpretation or opinion. I have tried to get you to look at something with a different angle. I have also gone almost overboard with the use of “I think/ I feel/ My opinion” so as to ensure I am not trying to say my way is the only way. “I want to go on record that I don't think you or parti-owners in general are suckers. I might think anyone paying $6000 and up for any yorkie is paying too much but I wouldn't say they are suckers IMO because I am not so sure I wouldn't find a way to pay that if it was the only way to have my two. They BECOME worth that much to me! Maybe, we could at least agree on that?