XPost: uk.rec.pets.misc, alt.med.veterinary, rec.pets.dogs.behavior   
   XPost: alt.animals.dog, alt.pets.dogs.pitbull, alt.pets.dogs.labrador   
   XPost: rec.pets.dogs.rescue, rec.pets.dogs.health, rec.pets.dogs.breeds   
   From: ThePuppyWizard@EarthLink.Net   
      
   You CAN'T make sumpthin WRONG, RIGHT.   
      
   THAT'S HOWE COME you mental cases   
   can't post your idiocy here abHOWETS   
   nodoGgamenedMOORE.   
      
   REMEMBER you lying dog abusing mental case?   
      
   The Amazing Puppy Wizard <{) ; ~  )  >   
      
   "Lee DeRaud"  wrote in message   
   news:641uu0hto4co0mb4du1qdrhbrtmh7cs7gj@4ax.com...   
   > On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:40:02 GMT, Handsome Jack Morrison   
   >  wrote:   
   >   
   > >I'm no electrical engineer(nor am I a marketing guru, but I'd   
   think I   
   > >know how to use this "feature" to my advantage, if I made   
   another   
   > >brand of e-collar, if I could, etc.), and I've never played one   
   on TV   
   > >either, but I think (prior to the now common practice of using   
   trickle   
   > >cell technology) the problem has something to do with the   
   receiver   
   > >always requiring a signal of some kind to continue to operate   
   > >correctly. Or even at all.   
   > >   
   > >But how could it be fraudulent, if they *clearly* disclosed in   
   their   
   > >manual, on their web site, etc., that the owner MUST keep the   
   battery   
   > >charged?   
   > >   
   > >I don't get it.   
   >   
   > Jack, I'm not saying it's fraudulent, just really *really* bad   
   design.   
   > And yes, I *am* an electrical engineer by training, even if I've   
   > worked the software side most of my career.   
   >   
   > >You're apparently trying to make it sound like Tri-Tronics   
   somehow did   
   > >this on purpose, hoping to sell additional receivers.   
   >   
   > No, actually I didn't. The original poster implied that and you   
   > disagreed; what I disagreed with was your characterization of   
   the   
   > design as "sloppy", which to me equates to "eh, could have been   
   > better" rather than the "gawd, does *that* suck" that it   
   deserves.   
   >   
   > > Well, *I* have   
   > >had nothing but *fantastic* experience with the folks back at   
   > >Tri-Tronics, and they've often went waaaay beyond the norm (or   
   what   
   > >was legally required of them to do) to satisfy their customers,   
   > >including myself.   
   >   
   > And they're to be commended for it: it sounds as though they've   
   as   
   > much as admitted that the design is suboptimal and are trying to   
   make   
   > things right.   
   >   
   > Lee   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)