I have no idea how I missed these posts. Having been asked by a mod to "stop arguing [and] attacks,"
I won't argue or attack. But I will clear up some misconceptions and correct some errors. In the following message my original comments are in black. Jag's comments are in red. And my responses to her are in blue.
Your sentence about how easy it is to call oneself a dog trainer is one of my points. It works for you, but is a bad thing for every other trainer? Many folks here are more than happy to give trainer's names that they've used to help someone looking for a trainer. I don't think it's that daunting of a process.
I never said a word about it being "a bad thing for every other trainer." Just because someone calls themselves "a trainer" does not make them competent. All of my clients come from "word of mouth" advertising, and yet, I have far more work than I want. I turn clients away quite regularly. My opinion of my competence comes from my clients.
Ecollars are not just for "proof[ing] behaviors" and whether your dog is dominant or submissive has nothing to do with using one.
This is one area where some of us disagree.
Having put Ecollars on well over 3,000 dogs, I know the facts of this. I've put Ecollars on some dogs that are far more dominant and some that are far more submissive, than most people here have seen. Both groups learned without issues.
I know of no trainers who "use only one tool" or who use one tool "in every situation." People who oppose the Ecollar usually have little to no experience with them and have little knowledge about their use.
It still seems to those of us reading here that your tool of choice is the only one you publicly advocate. This, to me, sound like a 'one tool box'.
I'm not responsible for how something "seems," to someone else. That's perception and it may, or may not be, reality. Anyone who reads my site with an open mind, or takes a look at the article I wrote on this site called "Establishing Dominance" knows the reality. I use "and publicly advocate" MANY tools.
I still don't understand the brushing off of in person trainers, especially for those that need fundamentals. I fail to see how anyone could be successful in training their dog without having any understanding of dogs.
I didn't "brush [anything] off." I said that it wasn't necessary, and that's a simple fact that's not rationally open to dispute. THOUSANDS, perhaps MILLIONS of dog owners have trained their dogs to their complete satisfaction from books, pamphlets, websites, and from advice from their friends. It's NOT necessary for an owner to attend classes to learn to train their dog. All that's necessary is that the OP read and follow the instructions.
The OP also has to have understanding.
No understanding is necessary for an owner to press the button, pull the dog towards them, and then to release the button when the dog is walking towards them. Yet, the dog learns to recall.
It's not necessary to "understand ... how dogs think and learn" to use my methods. It's helpful if one wants to understand what's going on, but it's certainly not necessary.
I find this a recipe for disaster, IMO.
In my experience this is common and no disasters have been reported.
Here's the often−seen thinly−veiled warning given about Ecollars, that the poster has "seen multiple dogs messed up ..." I'd bet a house payment that NONE of those trainers were using my methods. I'd bet that house payment that they were either using the Ecollar without direction or using it only for corrections. I often wonder why people make comments like this one, they're worthless as far as what I'm talking about. NEVER have my methods "messed up" a dog.
That you know of.
Given the nature of the Internet, if it had happened, someone would have posted about it. Given the ease of searches on the Internet, if it had been posted, anyone could find it with a search. No one has ever done so. If people want to go looking, that's fine with me. Instead you find, what you find on this forum. People who have used my methods report great success. They often drop my name and link to my site, as happened early in this thread.
Based on MY experience, and I've put Ecollars on well over 3,000 dogs, I WILL recommend them to inexperienced owners, if they are reading and following my methods. My website has MANY testimonials from such people who used them, per my methods, and had no dog training experience at all.
YOU haven't placed these collars, owners have. Unless you own that many dogs?
At one point in my seminar history, I started counting how many students attended, and how many dogs I worked. That is, dogs that I personally put Ecollars on. I stopped counting at 3,000 and that was many years ago.
If the owner has purchased an Ecollar, tries my methods and doesn't like the results, the Ecollar can be returned FOR A FULL REFUND, less a few bucks for shipping, as long as it's within 30 days of purchase. That being said, I've never had anyone ask for a refund.
How would you offer a refund on E-collars? Are you selling them yourself? If so, it's a blatant violation of board rules. No other member is allowed to sell their products (whether they made them, are a dealer, or otherwise without doing it under the headings where it's allowed. Anyone who is selling training equipment has a reason to push for others to use it.
Most reputable Ecollar dealers offer their clients a money−back−guarantee on their Ecollars, if they're returned within 30 days. I didn't invent this, it's been around for decades. I offer a money−back guarantee on my training with private clients, if the client is not happy with the results. Never had anyone ask.