Sherri wrote:
>I'm not posting anonymously and everything you just said really struck a
>nerve with me. From what I just read, I see you as one of those people who
>say they do things out of the kindness of their hearts, but then get angry
>when you don't get any thank you. If you're so kind, then the only thing
>that should matter to you is that you have saved these loved ones. The
>babies appreciate it, that I know.
Sherri, I have to strongly disagree. Anyone gets hurt after putting in
hours and hours over many months to help others, or giving a donation only
to find that these gifts of self are apparently taken for granted. When
someone translates their time (in efforts, or in donations -- which took
hours of work to earn the money) it is only logical, considerate, kind,
and fair that a thank you be sent. Now, that doesn't mean that the donor
shouldn't be patient, of course, because sometimes there just isn't time
to write, but it's sure not hard to even have a form note handy that says
something like, "Thank you! Your gift is making life easier for us and so
much better for the ferrets." then all it takes is maybe a second or two
to attach an address and send it out. It DOES MEAN A LOT when people put
their money where their mouths are and help ferrets; ditto when they lose
sleep or fun time to do so. Those gifts should never be diminished or
taken for granted. Respect and gratitude are logical gifts to return in
a few short words, and 2 scant seconds of time. It's easy and it is very
appreciated. Justifying NOT saying thank you takes even longer and makes
far less sense.
Jen wrote:
>All of us who have been recipeints of the generosity of good-hearted people
>should try to remember that, no matter how grateful you are in your heart,
>no one will know unless you tell them. And it's important. I'm sure many
>of us have been guilty of forgetting to tell someone how much we appreciate
>them, assuming they knew.
That is so beautiful, Jen.
Melissa wrote:
>One must assume that it was by accident that a thank you was not sent,
>and one cannot rule out the thought that, if a person has taken money from
>strangers because they are so bad off, perhaps they haven't gotten back
>on their feet enough to use even a small amount of that donated money on
>postage, thank you notes, long distance charges, or even internet access.
True. If the people do appear regularly; however, then it can be assumed
that access exists. Time could be short for a while, though.
Oh, and there ARE shelters out there which say, "Thank you!" We've
always found that Anne, Troy-Lynn, Kim, Bev, and several others have been
wonderful about that. Makes it easier to give when you know the money is
appreciated, makes it easier to give-up a night out or a piece of clothing
or something else to instead donate that money, makes it easier to know
which shelters or other charities will preferentially benefit. Money is
a limited resource, just as time is.
Air cleaners: we like hepa filters and find them worth the cost.
There are people who are allergic to ferrets. There also those who are
allergic to whole male ferrets but no other ferrets; these people (from
brief mentions here) seem to possibly also be allergic to cats a good
amount of the time. It's also possible that she is allergic to something
in the apartment itself, or that she is allergic to something which didn't
bother her in the past, or even certainly that it's NOT an allergy. I can
recall someone during a bad ragweed year who though that she/he (Can't
recall gender.) was allergic to the ferrets but actually the person had
just begun to develop a rag weed allergy but it was mild enough that it
took that extreme year to bring it out. Happens.
Sukie who is very thankful right now (Found out last night that a strange
thing that happened to Steve isn't something very bad medically which it
might have been, and we're very glad to have that possibility now
eliminated -- very, very, very glad and relieved.)
[Posted in FML issue 3156]
|
