To answer question, I'll elaborate on:
It wasn't so much the moderation (and I agree with your points above that as well)
which were:
.What Susan is doing TODAY... difficult, draining desperately needed..she's out there doing it alone..have learned enough wisdom over the years to refuse to let perceived insults dictate behavior, so my pique at the moderation of my comments ..will NOT interfere with my support of the awesome work she is doing to provide future cat owners with healthy, non-poisonous foods.
...every right to moderate it ..
.
Again,
(editing to reach charact limit)
I believe my submitting ideas supplement to hers were taken as such.
Please see background, to answer your question:
TAPF was one of the first places I ran to share info RE the Vet. Assns.-PFI "relationship" -- had already found all that out the hard way prior to recalls and finding TAPF.
Thought "Wow! This site is great! ALL info accumulated in one great place and here's more for her!"
However info was far from welcome at the time (seems to be a "sore spot" amongst most people, still.)
Was more than enthusiastic in sharing whatever info I hadn't yet seen posted in attempts to share what I had already learned, but even subsequent to the attention given AOL Consumer Guide's Hill's endorsement (thanks to AOLers creating enough stink and a veterinarian making a comment in response to the comments to ST's article concerning it), as far as keeping that momentum rolling, nope. These realities being reiterated only turned people off:
-There's NO influence more powerful over most pet owners' choices of what to feed than their trusted Veterinarian.
Does not matter
how many Dr Hodgkinses testify; Recalls; glutens; explanations of carnivores; 'Off The Juice' testimonies; Toxins; sudden cures of and REASONS for blocking cats, etc. NOTHING'll convince even my own immediate family of this -- let alone the FTC, FBI, every mediot humanly reachable, consumer groups, consmr. & animal ESQs, animal loving Senators, Attorneys General, anml. welfare orgs, hell even PITA, you name it.
As long as sooo many trusted vets continue to endorse and "prescribe" it, ALL those things, everybody's work, are
cancelled out 'd. Yes I know more people are aware today, but even now in post mass recall era, they
still have to get on the Internet & dig after finding it out the hard way. And there is NO influence with more power over
their associations than the PFI which so generously fund.
-Networks, including all their "faces" under a gag order to NOT badmouth the hand$ feeding them (too);
had one newsman tell me station wouldn't OK story but HE was printing it all out to take home cause HE had cats!
I've appealed for attention to and help to address these things repeatedly with ideas, suggestions, links, even papers abroad who had
already come through. Figured Dog's Breakfast saga last year had brought the latter fact home to wider range of people, so offered some suggestions of supplemental approaches on TAPF. All I did was get flamed.
So to answer:
was being totally straightforward when I suggested you offer to help Susan.
Actually help, or ideas, weren't welcome. No room. And getting flamed and preached down to on top of it by people ON the same side was the ultimate kick. I'd
expect that from PFI reps, mediots, Politicians, faux government agencies whose "actual" jobs it is to protect the interests of those in their interests and vice-versa (this is a reality and the Harvard law paper leaves no stone unturned in illustrating this), all the other$. But not people fighting the very same battle against the very same ingredients along with the very same powers-that-be, which need to be held accountable -- by somebody independent to it all.
It took me over two years to finally get the hint.
I tried to share what I knew and had already experienced first-hand on TAPF and was shot down when not totally ignored, participating in the comments sections.
Can't help it, I
believe that it will take somebody unbiased with no fingers in the jar to get things exposed but unfortunately one person continuing to
couldn't, and still cannot convince any such unbiased, independent people of anything. That darned Power in Numbers thing… one won't cut it. Believe me, I tried.
Questions already answered in the Harvard Paper -- and Dr Hodgkins' Testimony. (I'd sent a Dr Fox' letter to ST as well to reinforce one of her Articles.) Consider them to be worth a small country's weight in gold and had shared them there in the past. Would be some ammunition (and then some!) to go into those meetings with. But I got the strong impression that there was no room for such info. Maybe I'm wrong but that's the impression I was given. And it's OK, too, because opinions are subjective. Yet I've still wondered why that information was not welcome, and perhaps even shared & discussed…. coming from a veterinarian with incredible credentials (as well as being ESQ) and a Harvard Law person. Also can't get more unbiased than that. (I don't share my name on Net so it's not a need for 'recognition'.)
So I can relate to how Susan feels in regard to these unreachable people she's trying so hard to penetrate, and people not caring about the truths, the reality. But that's precisely how I'd been treated. Shouldn't be, JMHO only, when we're all on the same side.
At any rate, More power to her and I'm rooting for and wishing her well in this current endeavor.