The Dog Thread

[Vrede too]

Daniel wuz robbed!
https://mashable.com/article/westminste ... ba-poodle/

Tweet:

A poodle winning over a golden retriever like Daniel is everything that’s wrong with our country.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nQeYoYn03s

Frank Zappa "Dirty Love" Lyrics

[backing vocals Tina Turner & The Ikettes]

Give me
Your dirty love
Like you might surrender
To some dragon in your dreams

Give me
Your dirty love
Like a pink donation
To the dragon in your dreams

I don't need your sweet devotion
An' I don't want your cheap emotion
Whip me up some dragon lotion
For your dirty love
Your dirty love

Give me
Your dirty love
Like some tacky little pamphlet
In your daddy's bottom drawer

Give me
Your dirty love
I don't believe you never seen
His book before

I don't need no consolation
I don't want your reservation
I only got one destination
An' that's your dirty love
Your dirty love

Give me
Your dirty love
Just like your mama
Make her fuzzy poodle do
(Oh, Frenchie...)

Give me
Your dirty love
The way your mama
Make that nasty poodle chew

I'll ignore your cheap aroma
And your little-bo-peep diploma
I'll just put you in a coma
With some dirty love
Some dirty love
That dirty love
That dirty love

THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Snap it!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Snap it!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Snap it!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Not a speck of cereal!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Nothing but the best for my dog!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Come on!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Come on, Frenchie)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Little paws sticking up!)
THE POODLE BITES!
(Little curly head!)
THE POODLE CHEWS IT!
(Little curly tail!)

[billy.pilgrim]

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/02 ... etect-heat


"Dogs’ noses just got a bit more amazing. Not only are they up to 100 million times more sensitive than ours, they can sense weak thermal radiation—the body heat of mammalian prey, a new study reveals. The find helps explain how canines with impaired sight, hearing, or smell can still hunt successfully."

"The ability to sense weak, radiating heat is known in only a handful of animals: black fire beetles, certain snakes, and one species of mammal, the common vampire bat, all of which use it to hunt prey."

"If nothing else, the work suggests the extraordinary skills of the sled dog Buck, who tracked prey “not by sight or sound or smell, but by some other and subtler sense” in Jack London’s Call of the Wild, aren’t completely fictional after all."


Has k9nanny been around lately

[Vrede too]

... Has k9nanny been around lately

No posts since Jun 29, 2019. Looks like she's got any potential lurking hidden.
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=54

[billy.pilgrim]

... Has k9nanny been around lately

No posts since Jun 29, 2019. Looks like she's got any potential lurking hidden.
memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=54

I doubt she's the lurking type.

[Vrede too]

I doubt she's the lurking type.

Pardon me if I misunderstand, but that sounds like you're still stuck on the negative connotation which does not apply to internet activity. Idk one way or the other, but I could definitely see k9nanny checking up on what her friends are talking about now and then.

[billy.pilgrim]

I doubt she's the lurking type.

Pardon me if I misunderstand, but that sounds like you're still stuck on the negative connotation which does not apply to internet activity. Idk one way or the other, but I could definitely see k9nanny checking up on what her friends are talking about now and then.

See how easy it is to communicate using words that you understand.

[Vrede too]

Why do you pick fights that you've already lost?

See how easy it is to communicate using words that you understand.

... Otoh, you are too wussy to admit:

... Your "lurk" definition mistake, even when 5! sources PROVE you wrong: ...
Still waiting on those "many dictionaries" you claimed .

Ouch, does that mirror hurt your eyes? It's an anonymous forum. Admitting mistakes is no big deal. Try it sometime....

[billy.pilgrim]

Why do you pick fights that you've already lost?

See how easy it is to communicate using words that you understand.

... Otoh, you are too wussy to admit:

... Your "lurk" definition mistake, even when 5! sources PROVE you wrong: ...
Still waiting on those "many dictionaries" you claimed .

Ouch, does that mirror hurt your eyes? It's an anonymous forum. Admitting mistakes is no big deal. Try it sometime....

I would admit it if I was wrong. Lurk is a negative term when describing others. Your 5 (wow) sources probably agree.

[Vrede too]

I would admit it if I was wrong. Lurk is a negative term when describing others. Your 5 (wow) sources probably agree.

That's pitiful that you're resorting to lying when I've already shown you that the 5 sources PROVE you wrong, and you have cowered for post after post from showing us the "many dictionaries" you falsely claimed.

lurk

... Chiefly Computers. to read or observe an ongoing discussion without participating in it, as on a message board.

Not really. "Lurk" does have a negative and ominous connotation when describing irl activity. However, as the dictionary definition states it's pretty much a neutral term when describing internet activity, and that's how I used it ... Here's a different source saying pretty much the same thing:

Lurker

In Internet culture, a lurker is typically a member of an online community or PLN who observes, but does not participate. The exact definition depends on context. Lurkers make up a large proportion of all users in online communities. Lurking allows users to learn the conventions of an online community before they participate, improving their socialization when they eventually "de-lurk". However, a lack of social contact while lurking sometimes causes loneliness or apathy among lurkers.

Lurkers are referred to using many names, including browsers, read-only participants, non-public participants, legitimate peripheral participants, or vicarious learners.

The only negative to that is an implied tinge of sadness that lurkers aren't fully participating, but the whole irl malicious intent thing is stripped from the term.

Merriam-Webster

to read messages without contributing on an Internet discussion forum (such as a newsgroup or chat room) or social media platform (such as Facebook or Twitter)

Lexico/Oxford

Read the postings in an Internet forum without actively contributing.

Urban Dictionary

To read without commenting or contributing, therefore effectively invisible to the rest of the group or community. Generally recommended for joining any forum so that you can observe rules, attitudes and prominent personalities without jumping in and breaking a rule, making an ass of yourself, or asking a question about something obvious that you would have learned for yourself if you’d paid attention in the first place.

Online equivalent of attentive listening before speaking; potentially the solution to all Internet faux pas.

Why do you continue fights that you've already lost? Masochism? Ego too fragile to admit error?

[billy.pilgrim]

So sorry that you can't see the difference.


Maybe try reading the definitions you posted.

[O Really]

Maybe next you guys can discuss the term "troll." I say it's a piece of artwork under a bridge in Seattle, and a street name, no different from Clydesdale Lane.

[billy.pilgrim]

Maybe next you guys can discuss the term "troll." I say it's a piece of artwork under a bridge in Seattle, and a street name, no different from Clydesdale Lane.

It's the term for someone who tries to start an argument. Often they will use something discussed elsewhere in an attempt to derail another thread.

[Vrede too]

So sorry that you can't see the difference.

Maybe try reading the definitions you posted.

So sorry that you're illiterate, or just such a wimp when wrong. The definitions I posted, for internet activity, do NOT have the negative implications that you feel they should.

Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed?

It's the term for someone who tries to start an argument. Often they will use something discussed elsewhere in an attempt to derail another thread.

Ah, so you ADMIT that historic definitions and modern online definitions are often different. I won't hold my breath waiting for you to realize that you just shot your own whining down.

Hilarious irony, too. Here I am fondly posting about k9nanny and you come along and try to start an argument in an attempt to derail this thread with your past English-challenged flub.

[billy.pilgrim]

I didn't try to start an argument. I said that k9nanny isn't the lurker type.

That's a positive statement.

[Vrede too]

I didn't try to start an argument. I said that k9nanny isn't the lurker type.

That's a positive statement.

Only if you incorrectly feel that online lurking is negative.

Anyhow, I gave you an out by posting, "that sounds like you're still stuck on the negative connotation which does not apply to internet activity."

At that point you CHOSE to get snarky by question my understanding of the word that I've provided so many citations for, troll. Why lie about what we can all scroll up and see?

Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed? We all know that you've looked by now and can't find any that don't list the NEUTRAL online definition for "lurk". It's adorable that you're pretending otherwise.

[billy.pilgrim]

I didn't try to start an argument. I said that k9nanny isn't the lurker type.

That's a positive statement.

Only if you incorrectly feel that online lurking is negative.

Anyhow, I gave you an out by posting, "that sounds like you're still stuck on the negative connotation which does not apply to internet activity."

At that point you CHOSE to get snarky by question my understanding of the word that I've provided so many citations for, troll. Why lie about what we can all scroll up and see?

Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed? We all know that you've looked by now and can't find any that don't list the NEUTRAL online definition for "lurk". It's adorable that you're pretending otherwise.

Nope, I'm not wasting my time looking up what I have already done.

The only context I saw that wasn't negative related to someone new to a forum might lurk to get a feel for the characters before posting.

Lurk is a negative term. Observe might work better. Especially when you know that the person you are attempting to communicate with used a different definition than you.


No need to lie, you supplied the definitions.

[Vrede too]

It's the term for someone who tries to start an argument. Often they will use something discussed elsewhere in an attempt to derail another thread.

Ah, so you ADMIT that historic definitions and modern online definitions are often different. I won't hold my breath waiting for you to realize that you just shot your own whining down.

Keep cowering and deflecting from your self-debunking, it's a hoot!

... At that point you CHOSE to get snarky by question my understanding of the word that I've provided so many citations for, troll. Why lie about what we can all scroll up and see?

Accurate tangent history cowered from, as usual.

Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed? We all know that you've looked by now and can't find any that don't list the NEUTRAL online definition for "lurk". It's adorable that you're pretending otherwise.

Nope, I'm not wasting my time looking up what I have already done.

Point proved, they don't exist.

The only context I saw that wasn't negative related to someone new to a forum might lurk to get a feel for the characters before posting.

Just pitiful that you choose lying and the childish appearance of illiteracy over having the balls to admit error. None of those 5! sources claim negativity, not one, and you will cower from demonstrating your delusions in specific.

Anyhow, those neutral elaborations appearing in two different sources PROVE that my usage is perfectly acceptable. For a second time today you just shot your own whining down. I won't hold my breath waiting for you to admit it.

Lurk is a negative term.

Only irl, not online.

Observe might work better. Especially when you know that the person you are attempting to communicate with used a different definition than you.

It is not my responsibility to accommodate your ignorance. Man up.

No need to lie, you supplied the definitions.

Wussy projection, the definitions are crystal clear.

Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed?

[Vrede too]

... The only context I saw that wasn't negative related to someone new to a forum might lurk to get a feel for the characters before posting.

Lurk is a negative term. Observe might work better. Especially when you know that the person you are attempting to communicate with used a different definition than you.

No need to lie, you supplied the definitions.

Not that I have much hope given the hole you've dug for yourself, but let's look at an example of a definition that you are falsely calling "negative". This is the first one I posted, the one that should have ended the debate if you were rational and responsible:

lurk

... Chiefly Computers. to read or observe an ongoing discussion without participating in it, as on a message board.

We have both read or observed threads in this forum today without participating in them. Is that "negative"? Of course not.

There are posters like O Really (mostly) and probably others that have read or observed our debate today and have chosen not to join in, which is fine. Is that "negative"? Of course not.

We all have days or times of day when we read or observed this entire forum without participating in it by posting. Is that "negative"? Of course not, and you're lying to claim otherwise.

Prove me wrong instead of endlessly relying on your feelings. Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed?

[Vrede too]

Same puppy, pre and post mud play:


https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/bea ... 59022.html

[billy.pilgrim]

... The only context I saw that wasn't negative related to someone new to a forum might lurk to get a feel for the characters before posting.

Lurk is a negative term. Observe might work better. Especially when you know that the person you are attempting to communicate with used a different definition than you.

No need to lie, you supplied the definitions.

Not that I have much hope given the hole you've dug for yourself, but let's look at an example of a definition that you are falsely calling "negative". This is the first one I posted, the one that should have ended the debate if you were rational and responsible:

lurk

... Chiefly Computers. to read or observe an ongoing discussion without participating in it, as on a message board.

We have both read or observed threads in this forum today without participating in them. Is that "negative"? Of course not.

There are posters like O Really (mostly) and probably others that have read or observed our debate today and have chosen not to join in, which is fine. Is that "negative"? Of course not.

We all have days or times of day when we read or observed this entire forum without participating in it by posting. Is that "negative"? Of course not, and you're lying to claim otherwise.

Prove me wrong instead of endlessly relying on your feelings. Where are those "many dictionaries" you claimed?

Context, your sense of context is sorely lacking.