# Survey



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

Jean Donaldson at the Academy For Dog Trainers is conducting survey for dog owners. Please help by taking a few minutes to fill out. This helps our dogs in the long term. Thanks . http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1315556/Dog-Trainers-Research


----------



## Pucks104 (Aug 16, 2012)

Done.


----------



## Sheri (Oct 11, 2008)

Done.


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

thanks. did either of you read what the prize is


----------



## Sheri (Oct 11, 2008)

No, I'd didn't sign up for the prize. I figured I wanted to give theminfoifthey were gathering it, and didn't need payment, ha!


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

Sheri said:


> No, I'd didn't sign up for the prize. I figured I wanted to give theminfoifthey were gathering it, and didn't need payment, ha!


good for you Sheri, now I have a better chance to win.


----------



## emichel (May 3, 2012)

I don't need a prize, but I would like one.  I didn't see where it said what it is, though. If I win it will be a big surprise -- in more ways than one, since the last time I won anything was a teddy bear at a carnival when I was 10. Ha ha. Really, though, I liked the questions and was happy to participate.


----------



## RitaandRiley (Feb 27, 2012)

I didn't read about the prize either. What is it?


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

maybe a new puppy. :boink:


----------



## Zarika (Dec 16, 2012)

Did it!


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

Zarika said:


> Did it!


thanks


----------



## dwurms (Apr 17, 2013)

Done &#128516;

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## NvonS (Jul 8, 2010)

done.


----------



## puppy-love (Nov 9, 2012)

Done

Sent from Petguide.com Free App


----------



## SOPHIES-MOM (Oct 4, 2010)

Done!


----------



## jabojenny (Sep 18, 2011)

Done, didn't enter for the prize so Dave has a better chance, plus I think my winning streak ended at Nationals. Puppy?????? Really????? :laugh: Is that what you're after?


----------



## BearsMom (Jul 16, 2012)

done


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

thanks everyone.


----------



## morriscsps (Aug 17, 2010)

done.


----------



## wynne (Apr 30, 2011)

done


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

thanks


----------



## MarinaGirl (Mar 25, 2012)

Done


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

MarinaGirl said:


> Done


thanks a lot.


----------



## krandall (Jun 11, 2009)

I did it, but I thought it was kind of dumb, and quite frustrating. It sort of pre-supposed that your dog had "behavior problems" that needed "fixing", and that you had only taken one class with one trainer. In some places it would ONLY let you choose one answer, when you wanted to choose more than one, and in other places, it MADE you rank the importance of things that were ridiculously unimportant to me, like whether a TV star endorsed the program.

I'm not sure what they think they are going to get out of this survey, but I don't think it will be terribly meaningful.


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

I know why they're asking all them questions. These are all related somehow.


----------



## Caroline (Oct 9, 2012)

Done- There was an assumption that you've only seen one trainer, so that was hard because I've been very satisfied with some, but very unhappy with another. No category for that. 
Wonder what the prize is????


----------



## Lila (Apr 9, 2013)

Done


----------



## krandall (Jun 11, 2009)

Caroline said:


> Done- There was an assumption that you've only seen one trainer, so that was hard because I've been very satisfied with some, but very unhappy with another. No category for that.
> Wonder what the prize is????


That was part of my problem/complaint too. I've worked with two trainers that were not so great, (though nice people... Just not right for me and my dog) but several others who have been awesome. I work with a number of people, depending on what we're working on, and where we are in our training. I LOVED our puppy K trainer... She has become Kodi's home away from home when I travel. But I only worked with her for a few weeks. (She also teaches nosework at our training center, but Kodi and I aren't currently doing that). I currently work regularly with two different obedience trainers and an agility trainer.


----------



## Thebean28 (Jan 4, 2013)

Done


----------



## Beau's mom (Oct 6, 2011)

Done. And, I agree with Karen.


----------



## Tuss (Apr 22, 2012)

Done, 

Didn't sign up for the prize; don't want to be put on another mailing list! I Also agree with KAren that the questions were stupid. Assumes all "training" is for behaviour problems. I do training for competition obedience, which is for fun! The side benefit is that it avoids/prevents behaviour problems. You shouldn't wait until you have a problem to seek out the assistance of a trainer!


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

Tuss said:


> Done,
> 
> Didn't sign up for the prize; don't want to be put on another mailing list! I Also agree with KAren that the questions were stupid. Assumes all "training" is for behaviour problems. I do training for competition obedience, which is for fun! The side benefit is that it avoids/prevents behaviour problems. You shouldn't wait until you have a problem to seek out the assistance of a trainer!


it has a purpose believe me.


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

krandall said:


> I did it, but I thought it was kind of dumb, and quite frustrating. It sort of pre-supposed that your dog had "behavior problems" that needed "fixing", and that you had only taken one class with one trainer. In some places it would ONLY let you choose one answer, when you wanted to choose more than one, and in other places, it MADE you rank the importance of things that were ridiculously unimportant to me, like whether a TV star endorsed the program.
> 
> I'm not sure what they think they are going to get out of this survey, but I don't think it will be terribly meaningful.


Entirely agree, especially re the TV star!! Really annoying having to add to a list a whole lot of things that mean nothing at all so don't deserve, from my perspective, any ranking. It would be an interesting exercise to try and compile one's own survey with questions that were relevant...if only one had the time! Too busy training a puppy!!!


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

i'll mention again, there's a method to their madness , we conducted surveys at ipdta with similar "stupid" questions. they tell you a lot. lol


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

davetgabby said:


> i'll mention again, there's a method to their madness , we conducted surveys at ipdta with similar "stupid" questions. they tell you a lot. lol


Just so long as they accept the madness, I'll accept that there's method in it, Dave!!!


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

Lalla said:


> Just so long as they accept the madness, I'll accept that there's method in it, Dave!!!


right on lol ,didn't you know you can tell how stupid a person is, by asking a stupid question. law of effect lol


----------



## davetgabby (Dec 29, 2007)

I just took a survey a minute ago on Michael j Fox's parkinsons site, it was two questions. lol help out with their research by taking this https://www.michaeljfox.org/understanding-parkinsons/living-with-pd/topic.php?smell-loss


----------



## gertchie (Jan 28, 2012)

OK Dave, I took them both but I did enter to win the prize...good luck!


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

davetgabby said:


> right on lol ,didn't you know you can tell how stupid a person is, by asking a stupid question. law of effect lol


Hmmm...maybe it's just stupid to be irritated by being asked the stupid questions?! There's lots of interesting research into how to do interesting research; interesting that it points in the direction of asking stupid questions the better to winkle out the stupid answerers with their stupid answers; I'd be interested to know how, overall, that is interesting. And I'm enjoying sounding like an excerpt from a Tom Stoppard play!!!! Think I'll stoppard now.


----------



## krandall (Jun 11, 2009)

I have to say that the ONLY reason I completed the survey (dog one, not PD) was because Dave asked us to. If I'd come across this on my own, I would have stopped in disgusts after a few of the questions. That, in and of itself, is something they should want to avoid. They have their reasons, but I am sure this could have been designed better. You get no information at all if people won't complete the survey. You get inaccurate results if you force people into answering in a way that doesn't express their views.


----------



## emichel (May 3, 2012)

Jeez, lighten up you geniuses, you're going to scare away the newbies and all of the just average people. I've learned from many years of trying to fit my square peg self into the round hole of life that there is very little that is custom designed to fit my situation exactly. Have you never taken a standardized test in school? Have you never developed the skill of going "huh?", scratching your head, and then picking an answer? You do realize that many people learned all they know about how to train dogs from famous TV personalities, right? I barely remember the questions, I just answered them because Dave asked me to and I thought I might win something. Though hopefully not a puppy, fun as it would be. It's just that as much as I have loved Havanese Forums, sometimes I find all of the vehemence to be exhausting. Don't worry, I'll just look at the cute puppy pics and wait for my prize (Dave?) -- but seriously, I do worry about the newbies. I still love y'all, though. Really.


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

emichel said:


> Jeez, lighten up you geniuses, you're going to scare away the newbies and all of the just average people..... It's just that as much as I have loved Havanese Forums, sometimes I find all of the vehemence to be exhausting. Don't worry, I'll just look at the cute puppy pics and wait for my prize (Dave?) -- but seriously, I do worry about the newbies. I still love y'all, though. Really.


I think that one of the lovely things about this forum is that it is so varied in its membership; there are those who probably only want to look at 'cute puppy pics'; there are those with problems who seek support and answers and solidarity; there are those who come to learn as much about this enchanting breed as they can; there are those who have massive amounts of experience and the generosity to share it, and there are 'newbies', some of whom really enjoy learning from that experience. I find it unbelievably sad that if anyone has something intelligent to contribute they could ever be accused (it sounds like an accusation to me!!) of being 'geniuses'. I find it equally sad when energetic and passionate debate is described at 'vehemence'. There are people on this forum who care passionately about how their dogs are trained (I am one of them). 'Newbies' can find hundreds of cute puppy pics, cheerful and enjoyably entertaining lightweight banter, information and fun on this forum. Some of them might enjoy either just following along with, or joining in with perhaps less lightweight discussion on occasion. If not, there is absolutely no need to do so and many other places to engage. I'm sure lots has been learned by lots of people from TV personalities. Some of us are lucky enough to have learned just how much more there is to learn, and want to share that fact. Jim Watson (the Watson of Watson and Crick) once said "If you find that you are the cleverest person in the room, you are in the wrong room". We all need to learn. I am very happy to say that I am by no means the cleverest person in this forum and that is why I know I will learn here. As well as enjoy looking at cute puppy pics, posting some of my own, laughing, sympathising, crying, having fun, sharing joys and sorrows, hearing stories and engaging in really useful discourse. I'm very sad if any of that discourse should come across as 'vehemence' and apologise for inadvertently putting off anyone from engaging in just one part of a diverse and fascinating forum. Don't go away, newbies! Just don't ask those of us who care about unraveling problems, who can hack the disagreements, and who are learning so much from happily above-average information to 'lighten up'.


----------



## emichel (May 3, 2012)

Of course, Lalla, there is a wealth of information on here and it would be a shame to limit ourselves to cute puppy pics, and I have been known to go off on a passionate diatribes or two myself, especially in the early days when I was struggling with potty training my puppy and not getting enough sleep. It's just that several of you were using the word "stupid", over and over again in different posts, in regard to the survey questions. It felt that you were doing it in a way that sounded like you thought you were on the side of right and good, and others who were too stupid to know that the questions were stupid were stupid, and I objected to the tone. I studied research methods and design in graduate school I thought it was rather boring, though important to know, but that was not my area of interest. I don't, however, think that people who are interested in it are stupid, just different from me. I'd still rather not see elaborate discussions about it on Havanese Forums, since I don't think it directly impacts learning about dogs. At any rate.... My reference to people learning about dogs from TV personalities was meant to say that I assumed that the questions did have a "method to the madness" as well as a madness to the method perhaps, and I was willing to go with it. It seemed that they were trying to suss out what kinds of people were on here taking the survey, their experience, knowledge base, whatever. Honestly, I didn't think about it too much I just took it. It wasn't that important to me. Debating passionately about whether puppy mills are OK (if there's anyone on here arguing for them) seems worthwhile. Re: most other things, I prefer a more respectful, "Here's what's worked for me, if you'd like to try it", or "here's an article that I thought was interesting". There are many very knowledgeable people on here who manage to communicate in this manner, and I find it much easier to learn from than being hit over the head with something. Especially in the early days when I was so tired and knew so little, it was at times hard to take when I'd just spent a lot of money on whatever for my dog, and then was told "oh, I'd never give that to my dog". Of course our dog's well being is foremost, and if something is truly likely to hurt him I'd like to know about it, but a more diplomatic "I would be careful with that, I and several others on here have had bad experiences" is a much more effective way of communicating, in my view. And also, with dog stuff as in most of life, there is rarely only one correct way to do things. So, the genius comment was sarcastic, I suppose, and I apologize for that. But please realize that yes, there are all kinds of people on here, all ages, city mice and country mice, more educated and less educated, well off and not so well off financially, with decades or a few years or a few days of experience with dogs. But still, we can all learn from each other, and I think it's important for newer people to feel that their opinions from what they have learned in their experience with their dog, even if limited, is valuable and worthy of sharing, too. That's all, it's really late and now I just want to know what I am going to win from this danged survey. Or, if I don't win, at least I want to know what it is! The prize, I mean. I don't need to know what the survey is, I'll let Dave take care of that


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

I take all your points, Eileen, and thank you for your thoughtful response. Positive reinforcement isn't only for dogs!! The use of the word 'stupid', I had hoped but was obviously wrong, had been so well and truly bandied about as to make the point that it was a fairly stupid word in the first place; hence my 'Tom Stoppard' comment. I'm not sure how well his plays are known in the US, but he is famously brilliant at tying intellectual knots in semantics and grammar and vocabulary and I was making a feeble attempt to invoke such shenanigans exactly in order to put the word in its place. Humour, however, has a fine habit of back-firing, so if I didn't get across that I was trying to be funny, then forgive me, do. And goodness knows I have no such delusions as to think that I am 'on the side of right and good'!!! If only!!! I take your point, too, about feeling downhearted if some expensive something acquired is denigrated. You are quite right that it's undiplomatic and unhelpful to try and force a personal opinion on anyone; opinions backed up by evidence are one thing but "I wouldn't give it to my dog" is no good reason to try and bully anyone else into feeling the same way. I guess we all have to accept that dog ownership, like children, gardening, cooking - I daresay there's a long list - is one of those potentially combustible topics. We can still, as you say, all learn from each other. Some of the very best 'dog people' are hopeless 'people people';maybe that's exactly why they are good dog people, in some cases? I'm sure we all try to be both kinds of person. I'm sure we sometimes fail on both counts. I KNOW I'm not very up on all sorts of things to do with dog-ownership which is why I love this forum - I'm learning so much. I'll try to learn better diplomacy while I'm at it!! I do hope you win whatever it is (if it's something you actually WANT to win!!!) from the survey. Or if you don't, that Dave does!!!! Not quite sure why it's such a secret??!!


----------



## krandall (Jun 11, 2009)

One thing to remember (and I went back and re-read my posts... I think I stated clearly WHAT my objections were) is that all this "debate" over the survey has kept it close to the top of the list. if we weren't talking about it, it would just scroll off the bottom of the page, out of sight and mind. So we are actually doing Dave a FAVOR by continuing to talk about it. 

(and considering how long people felt COMPELLED to open up the "Don't read this" thread, there is something to be said for negative publicity! :laugh


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

krandall said:


> (and considering how long people felt COMPELLED to open up the "Don't read this" thread, there is something to be said for negative publicity! :laugh


what does this last bit mean, Karen? I don't think I'm up to speed on "don't read this thread" compulsions!!! Very glad, whatever it means, if we are doing Dave a favour by continuing the 'vehement' 'debate'!!!


----------



## emichel (May 3, 2012)

Lalla said:


> I do hope you win whatever it is (if it's something you actually WANT to win!!!) from the survey.


Thank you, Lalla, but if Dave's behind it, I'm worried about what it might be. THAT WAS A JOKE! 



Lalla said:


> I guess we all have to accept that dog ownership, like children, gardening, cooking - I daresay there's a long list - is one of those potentially combustible topics.


At least, thankfully, for the most part people have the good sense to keep away from national (U.S.) politics on here! I know you're in the U.K., so may or may not be aware that things are _extremely_ polarized over here at this point, to where I have become very concerned about the state of the union, so to speak. I think that if people started inserting nasty political comments inside of the regular threads I would be gone! In the buildup to the last presidential election there were some threads in the Coffee Shop area about it, which is fine because you have a choice whether or not to go there. I did, a bit, and somewhat regretted it, as I'd prefer to like everyone on here, and if they have political views that I think are insane I'd rather not know about it!

Well, I had to post this so as to do my bit to keep it at the top... _for Dave_.


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

Goodness, Eileen, dangerous stuff!!! You nearly opened up a political debate there!!! I haven't ventured into the Coffee Shop area - maybe some instinct for self preservation prevailed!! Union? What union? Yes, I am very aware, English though I am, of the polarisation in your country. (see, we spell it with an 's' and my spell checker objected to a 'z'!!) I, like you, would have been driven away if discussions about dogs turned to head-butting politics. I guess because our dogs are so personal to us that sometimes honest argument and debate can seem personal, too, where they are not meant to. That's exactly why I love science - it removes the personal. Anecdote is really fun and useful in its place, but when the going gets rougher at least scientific evidence is, or should be, a way out of the personal. I feel so sad when, for some people, science = heavy; it isn't!! It's exciting, illuminating, it doesn't take sides, it educates without saying anything about the person doing the reporting of plain facts. Yes, there is a lot that science can't tell us, but the things it DOES know answers to can be so incredibly helpful. There ARE scientists out there who bring politics into the mix and try and co-opt their science into their ideals, but let's not!!! For disentangling some of the problems that we find with our beloved dogs it is so good sometimes to get away from the judgemental, the anecdotal, the personal; for entertainment and fun, all those things are so important, too. There's room for both, isn't there; perhaps we should have a thread symbol to warn off anyone who would rather stick with the latter, and give anyone a chance to find were to go who would really enjoy the former, too?

Forgive us, Dave, your questionnaire post has metamorphosed, but perhaps that is yet another of the joys of this forum, that threads can develop and run? If not, do tell me off and I'll try and learn to behave better and follow rules that I might not yet have learnt!l


----------



## krandall (Jun 11, 2009)

Lalla said:


> what does this last bit mean, Karen? I don't think I'm up to speed on "don't read this thread" compulsions!!! Very glad, whatever it means, if we are doing Dave a favour by continuing the 'vehement' 'debate'!!!


Oh, it was just a VERY old thread that someone replied to, which lead to other replies, all over "information" that was WAY out of date. In an effort to stop the confusion, Tom King (who had started the original thread) changed the name of it to "don't read this" or something like that. The result was that people couldn't HELP themselves, kept opening it, posting silly remarks about curiosity, and it remained don the top of the Forum for WEEKS! :laugh: It hadn't gotten NEARLY that much attention when it actually WAS "news". ... I think it has sifted back toward the bottom again now.


----------



## Lalla (Jul 30, 2013)

krandall said:


> Oh, it was just a VERY old thread that someone replied to, which lead to other replies, all over "information" that was WAY out of date. In an effort to stop the confusion, Tom King (who had started the original thread) changed the name of it to "don't read this" or something like that. The result was that people couldn't HELP themselves, kept opening it, posting silly remarks about curiosity, and it remained don the top of the Forum for WEEKS! :laugh: It hadn't gotten NEARLY that much attention when it actually WAS "news". ... I think it has sifted back toward the bottom again now.


Got it! It's a sort of childish impulse, isn't it - don't go there, don't look at that, don't read this....whatever kids are told not to do they'll rush to do. Ditto the "grown ups". C'est la vie! Useful to remember, though, if one really wants to get something read - negative advertising, way to go!


----------

