Dog Mauling at Torrent

Post by **Lateralus** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:06 pm

If that was directed at me I wasn't threatened by anything, I found the "honest mistake" part humorous nothing more. I agree with kneebar, if Mark doesn't want the cash, give it to him anyway

Post by **SCIN** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:17 pm

My comment wasn't directed toward anyone. I just read through the whole thread real quick and that was the *vibe* that I got.

Post by **Jeff** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:35 pm

Lateralus wrote:I assumed the original poster had talked to Mark personally to give such information that he was thinking about closing down Torrent after his dog was attacked by some thoughtless people with a long dog leash, etc... Where did this story come from anyway considering it doesn't remotely jive with what actually happened? I'm curious what you'll say when you give Mark the money? "I made up a story on the Internet and some folks felt sorry for you... here's the money for vet bills that you already turned down by the folks ( that already made the situation ok weeks ago) who owned the dog that tried to eat your toothless dog."

I can almost see Mark-- huh, say what!?

funny stuff

How does it not even remotely jive?
Spragwa and I were climbing at the same crag on Sunday. We were both talking about what had happened. I was not aware of any threats of closing Torrent.
You can go back to page one of this thread and re-read what I posted. It was what Mark told me. There was never any discussion of it having happened 3 weeks ago or that the climber came to Mark about the incident.
It doesn't change what happened anyway.
The fact that everyone is pulling together and showing support is a positive thing, and I don't think anyone was ever pointing fingers at anyone or trying to stir up **it.

Post by **Spragwa** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:28 pm

Thanks everyone. I'm going to talk to Mark today. What I was told and I've heard nothing to dispute this, is that when the owners grabbed their dog it came up with Mark's dog in its mouth. If simple minor scratches resulted, that's news to me. In fact, to me that's a mauling.

I wasn't trying to stir shit up. I was trying to find out who did it and get them to apologize to Mark, which they graciously did. I agree with Jeff and stand by my original post. If Mark tells me differently when I speak with him. I'll be happy to post an apology.

Post by **the lurkist** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:30 pm

I just read through this thread. I am sure Mark and Kathy are appreciative of the thoughtfulness of the concern.
The take home, I think, isn't that we like the Meyers or are concerned about their dog, or that we have a sense of responsibility about their dog's (and their) suffering. All of these things are true.
The take home that no one has mentioned, and is a re occuring theme in the community, is that dogs will be dogs and should be left at home. Everyone's dog is a nice dog. No one's dog is aggressive. I say this without a facetious intent. Most dogs truely are. But intrinsic in a dog's nature is to occasionally be aggressive. Why don't we talk about the real issue- dogs at the cliff.

Post by **Artsay** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:38 pm

the lurkist wrote:Why don't we talk about the real issue- dogs at the cliff.

Ummm....no thanks.
If we talk about that *again* it'll just lead to a heated discussion and I'll probably unintentionally piss you off again.

Besides, that's not the issue.

Who likes cooked carrots?

Post by **Sunshine** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:40 pm

I vote for no dogs at the crag.

Post by **Spragwa** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:47 pm

the lurkist wrote:I just read through this thread. I am sure Mark and Kathy are appreciative of the thoughtfulness of the concern.
The take home, I think, isn't that we like the Meyers or are concerned about their dog, or that we have a sense of responsibility about their dog's (and their) suffering. All of these things are true.
The take home that no one has mentioned, and is a re occuring theme in the community, is that dogs will be dogs and should be left at home. Everyone's dog is a nice dog. No one's dog is aggressive. I say this without a facetious intent. Most dogs truely are. But intrinsic in a dog's nature is to occasionally be aggressive. Why don't we talk about the real issue- dogs at the cliff.

LOL! Love you Lurk. We can discuss dogs at the cliff but I'll always fall back to taking mine with me. It's good for her, I enjoy it and she's in her natural habitat. If we take responsibility for our animals, I think that they're a joy to have around. If we bring overtly aggressive animals, it's not so fun.

People have their opinions about what makes for a fun day at the cliff whether it's large groups, no groups, dogs, no dogs, cats, no cats, loud screaming beta, silence and serenity, loud people, calm people; even kids, no kids and girls, no girls. Some guys just want a silent circle jerk at the crag. As long as we live in a society, there will be conflict between peoples wants desires and needs. That's just my two cents though

Post by **Artsay** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:48 pm

If my two cents agrees with your two cents, is that four cents?

Post by **the lurkist** » Wed Jun 09, 2004 4:57 pm

That's why I brought it up, b/c no one else will. It is like the big pink elephant in the room that no one wants to acknowledge. It is there, none the less.
I like cooked carrots.