Tom,

If Mary had written, as you did, "if you had kept the cat indoors, you could
have
prevented this unfortunate occurrence." no one would have responded at all.

As to implication, because of her choice of words in her message, I read it
quite differently. To me it said: "You didn't follow politically correct
behavior as regards your cat and therefore you have no right to feelings of
pity or to help the nestling."

I regard that as arrogant and insensitive. As to hurt feelings, your own
post shows that it's possible to make a point without being cruel or nasty.

The original poster was upset and trying to make amends. A more sympathetic
response would probably go a lot further in convincing her to keep her cat
indoors than blasting her when she asks for help will.

There's already too much rudeness and intolerance on this list if you ask
me.

Steve Kimball
Federal Way, WA
skimball at halcyon.com


----- Original Message -----
From: Tom Foote <footet at elwha.evergreen.edu>
To: Jim Rosso <jrosso at mediaseek.com>
Cc: <tonihawr at email.msn.com>; <Hummer at isomedia.com>;
<imagemaker at connectcorp.net>; Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 11:09 AM
Subject: Re: Can you direct me to a wild bird rescue near Olympia WA


>
>
> On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Jim Rosso wrote:
>
> >
> > I am concerned that if I don't reply to this unfortunate posting then I
> > imply that I support such a terrible tone. I am very disappointed that
you
> > feel compelled to write such stuff. The rest of us mere mortals have to
> > deal with life as it unfolds and try to make the best of situations. I
> > think we should be supportive of those efforts.
> >
> > Jim Rosso
> >
> > At 09:27 AM 8/20/99 -0700, Mary Manson wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Excuse my asking - but why bother ? Your bird house appears to be
> > >for cat-play purposes ..... ;- { .....
> > >
> >
> Jim et al--
>
> there has been extensive discussion about the damage cats
> do to wild life when they are allowed to roam free outside.
> We've gone around and around about this and it even resulted
> in what is now referred to as "The Dreaded Cat Thread"...
> we were presented with stat after stat about the damage
> free ranging cats do.
>
> I don't see why anyone should be upset about Mary's post.
> All she said was, (if you want the implication more directly)
> "if you had kept the act indoors, you could have
> prevented this unfortunate occurence."
>
> so, I guess I'm less concerned about hurt feelings than I
> am about whether the lesson was learned here.. i.e., is
> the cat that killed that mother bird going to
> be allowed outdoors to continue it's marauding on wildlife?
> That's the important question in this sequence of unfortunate
> events.. the anguish after the fact won't prevent future
> predation..
>
> Tom
>
>