Yapping / barking dogs
Comments
-
+1
0 -
Please don’t generalise, WK. I will never defend irresponsible dog owners but stop, look around you and note how many owners do act responsibly and have well behaved pets.
As always, it’s the bad who are remembered. It’s the same with drivers on site as no one remembers those who stick to the speed limit, only those who exceed it.
1 -
Some are no pets HD, bit like some are AO. Gives members choice, some are happy on all inclusive CLs, others may opt for pet free, or child free. There's usually a good reason, down to what owners prefer to provide.
0 -
As I said earlier there are still some who won't accept that it is the onsite staff's responsibility to ensure that the CMC on site rules are complied with by all.
I think that after well over 30 Years membership of the CC/CMC entitles me to comment on threads about subjects on which I've had much experience.
Because I am carrying out an extended survey to find the most scenic sites at the most cost effective rates. I didnt renew my CMC discount card. So far I've located enough excellent sites to keep me busy for a few years.
K
0 -
Do the mods have the facility to check out the actual id’s of these anti dog posters? I had a similar problem on another site I mod for and was easily able, via ip addresses etc to prove it was the one person using multiple id’s.
These threads are popping up with boring regularity and are so similar in their vein and the OP seldom responds.
3 -
I think the staff can check, Phil, but not the mods. I know what you mean about spotting aliases and it doesn’t always involve using technology. 😎
However, if the poster is a member, it’s difficult to see how they can adopt a false ID. It’s the non-members who are usually most suspect.
0 -
Just have a look through the Site Directory, HD, and you'll see that a relatively few CLs have the dog symbol with a line through it...no dogs allowed. A quick check on the web site would suggest that there are about 138 that don't allow dogs, out of 2250.
0 -
perhaps they're the 'unusual suspects'?
makes a change, I guess
anyway, members are entitled to discuss their preferences (or not) in an array of subjects, including dogs....
folk get upset by (for example) rising prices and regularly voice their opinions, as they do with other subjects that 'annoy'...
with the propensity of dogs on site, this will always be a noticible 'situation" for non dog folk, who perhaps 'pick up' (and comment on) on any 'incidents' they encounter....perhaps dog owners (even those who do see the odd issue) don't report it on CT....why would they...?
its therefore likely to be non dog folk who 'see' these things and feel they wish to vent their spleen...
pjust as any other poster might do with a subject not necessarily dear to their heart....
thats life...
1 -
I booked three weeks on an adults only site. Also I noticed that they had a no dogs section and as we hadn't got a dog at the time I asked for that as well in case we got put next to someone with a load of dogs. We thought it was a bit noisy with lots of barking. Turned out that over the large hedge next to our pitch was the local boarding kennels. Oh well....
1 -
It's not trolling to point out about staff being the ones to uphold good behaviour on Club Sites, although most visitors would consider that common sense. But it becomes trolling when the voracity and tone of staff baiting is cynical and unrelenting, it's that I find distasteful. The staff cannot respond on the forum as members of Club with the same freedom as none staff members, and that's how it becomes baiting. They will have to follow a stricter code of behaviour being employees of the Club, possibly why so few actually feel able to contribute? Who wants to stand up against a wall to be constantly sniped at when you cannot respond as you want to in your defence? They are good people doing a good job, regardless of why they do it.
I could point out instances of site owners and staff removing unsocial and badly behaved visitors, for a variety of reasons, across a number of different holiday types, including rarely Club Sites and CLs. Asking a visitor to leave from private property is a whole lot easier than doing it on somewhere that will probably involve a full investigation and staff interviews. The staff have to follow strict protocol, have to make sure their reasons are watertight in case of any comebacks. Private owners can just say "off, now!" The only debate will be if any fees have been taken and are refunded!
4 -
yes fully agree with all of that but in particular:
But it becomes trolling when the voracity and tone of staff baiting is cynical and unrelenting, it's that I find distasteful
It is extra distasteful that the posters who keeps on doing this never goes to club sites.
3 -
Have you take It up with the owners themselves? Or mentioned it to the wardens? Or did you just decide it would be a good idea to jump on the latest anti dog bandwagon here on CT?
If my dogs were causing a nuisance, which fortunately for us they just don't, I'd want to know about it so that I could do someyhing about it, not read some spurious claim on here which may or may not refer to me!
5 -
Why should anyone post under their real name and expose themselves to all the internet can throw at them? You don’t, David.
As for photos in avatars, it’s near impossible to post them these days.
2 -
I know you do and that’s the reason I will not post on that forum. C&CC refused to back down on the issue so I give it a miss.
It's purely a security matter as far as I’m concerned and nothing devious.
0 -
Sorry, DD. I made that sound as if you’re the reason I won’t post on C&CC.
0 -
WHAT?, His first name isn’t ‘another’, who knew eh😂😂
great post Tinny👍🏻
0
