---

ORIGINAL: LittleChief

You're absolutely correct, of course. There are a few on here, however, that seem tohaveturned the insult-slinging argumentinto an artform.

---

---

For instance, yesterday when we discussed donating animals. Not everyone that donotes are slobs. No doubt about it. But I just got thru dealing with a fellow hunter who is a slob when it comes to that.

Or on this thread, I mentioned some don't like the slobnish of baiting. Now, I am not exactly a fan of baiting, but I don't feel that way. But most I know that oppose it, does feel that way. I don't like baiting because I feel it leads itself to spread disease.

---

---

ORIGINAL: bigcountry

Then there is the rare few like kent who I believe seriously doesn't care what someone thinks. You got to respect that.

I admit I like a good argument on the road, in person, or on the web.

I think the web just lends people to argue more. For some like myself, I make blanket statments. Probably a bad practice. But I do this for a few reasons. The main one is I am lazy on typing and know it would take me twice as long to reply if I covered exactly prescisly how I feel on a subject. For instance, yesterday when we discussed donating animals. Not everyone that donotes are slobs. No doubt about it. But I just got thru dealing with a fellow hunter who is a slob when it comes to that.

Or on this thread, I mentioned some don't like the slobnish of baiting. Now, I am not exactly a fan of baiting, but I don't feel that way. But most I know that oppose it, does feel that way. I don't like baiting because I feel it leads itself to spread disease.

---

---

ORIGINAL: LittleChief

Understood. Well, almost understood, 'cause I don't know who "Kent" is.:D I don't mind a good debate, but I don't like arguments. Despite the fact that in a debate, you do "argue" your point, it's supposed to be done respectfully and under a set of rules or guidelines. If not, at least a little courtesy and respect is included.

---

---

ORIGINAL: GMMAT

Again....is the guy hunting the artificial ag crop's INTENT not to lure the deer into bow range via the crop he's sitting over?

What's his intention....if not that?

---

---

ORIGINAL: wahoohunter

It's the INTENT of the product not the intent of the hunter that makes the difference. corn fields are not aimed at luring in deer, in fact, I think you'd find most farmers prefer the deer stay out. A bait pile is just that, BAIT to lure an animal in

---

---

It's the INTENT of the product not the intent of the hunter that makes the difference. corn fields are not aimed at luring in deer, in fact, I think you'd find most farmers prefer the deer stay out. A bait pile is just that, BAIT to lure an animal in

---

---

ORIGINAL: GMMAT

So it's the intent of the product, now....and not the intent of the hunter?

I'm assuming, then....that if the personputting out cornsimply stated he was supplemental feeding....then his intent for his product couldn't be misconstrued as baiting?

I'll buy yours if you buy mine!

---

---

The intent of the product is based on who sets it out. Corn in piles is put out by hunters (some of whom may be farmers) but it is in no way, shape or form put out for any reason other than luring in an animal.

---

---

ORIGINAL: GMMAT

I just told you his intent was to supplementally feed the animals. That's noble.....just like the farmer's intent (even though his involves a profit motive).

What's the hunter hunting the ag field edge using the corn for? To lure in an animal?

If you wanna say you're against baiting at all costs.....just say so. Tiptoeing around/trying to justify why an equally artificial food source ISN'T baiting is ludicrous.

---