>From:    Sandi Ackerman <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Petco Yuck!
>Dick does respond to "negative" posts *off* the FML
 
Never heard from him on negative topics.  Perhaps there is a reason.
 
>Cynical as this may be, Petco comes out ahead by *giving* their damaged
>merchandise away.
 
Doubtful.  As we understand tax laws, donations are not written off at
full value.  Losses are.  Donating even their unsalables would cost them
money.
 
>Since ferrets are supposed to be the third most popular pet, that must put
>rabbits way lower on the scale.
 
Oddly enough, the PIJAC statistics that put ferrets third is badly
misquoted.  A group of animals that includes both rabbits and ferrets was
third after dogs and cats.
 
>Petco *is* exploiting ferrets.
 
Basically most of us here are.  Shelters, breeders, organizations, even
owners.  But it is all a matter of definition.
 
Bringing back yours.
 
>"Exploit: conspicuous act or deed; make complete use of; turn to one's own
>advantage; utilize selfishly".  Petco exploits both ferrets and ferret
>shelters.
 
Hmm... The shelters that get donations through the FML based SOS fund are
exploiting this list.  "Turn to one's own advantage".  That isn't a bad
thing.  It just is.
 
Anyone who takes advice from this list is exploiting the information
received if they "make complete use of" it.
 
>From:    Kim Burkard <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: paralyzed ferret; Petstores; Magazines; BeastMaster;
>         Vaccines; Y2K
 
(bill on this - had hoped none of this would be necessary but the other
posts went through)
 
>Just because it is new doesn't mean it is compliant
 
Just because a product doesn't have a "Y2K Compliant" sticker doesn't mean
it isn't.  Some companies I've talked to as a software engineer such as
compiler or database manufacturers can't list themselves as compliant.  But
nothing about the product should even require a "sticker" but they lose
sales because of the hysteria.  If another company buys their product which
can't be "Y2K Compliant" then when they use that product to make a new
product then that product can't be certified as "Y2K Compliant". <sigh>  Its
a racket.  Not one line of software I've written ever is certifiable as Y2K
compliant but not one line will have any problem.  (Well maybe some program
I wrote in Basic on my Commodore 64 that doesn't even exist anymore since
Basic on that machine is a bit limitted.)
 
Since it was mentioned that my PC might have a problem on 1/1/2000 and
require having its date set.  Well since Win 95/98 (whatever) crashes every
couple days and has broken my clock anyway, whats special about that day?
 
DOS and its descendants count "seconds" since 1/1/1980 which makes them
immune to Y2K.  Unix does the same but from 1/1/1970 so it too is immune.
Don't know enough about MacOS but would be extremely surprised if it uses
the extremely obsolete COBOL storage of dates in BCD (Binary Coded Decimal)
My father did COBOL.  I've been dealing with computers since oh about 1968.
Relax.  Y2K is a great way for a lot of money of be spent - much of it
pointlessly.
 
>From:    Bryan Strickland <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Critter litters
>I've noticed quite a few posts on the different types of litter used and
>was wondering if anyone has heard of or used "Feline Pine" Litter?
 
We prefer "Pine Fresh" but this is one of the litters we mentioned in our
last post.  Pine is implicated as possibly causing respiratory problems
but the litters don't seem to be as bad as the chips.
 
bill and diane killian
zen and the art of ferrets
http://www.zenferret.com/
mailto:[log in to unmask]
[Posted in FML issue 2371]