Aha! These are the kinds of answers I'm looking for. Opinions (which everyone is entitled to) and yet nonetheless qualified with statements such as general excellence, not necessarily tested. I think everyone is entitled to recognize a dog they feel was wonderful in a production aspect regardless of said dog. If CH Studly Who Wins All The Time was a great producer of fabulous typey dogs he should be noted as such even if everything he produced died at 3 years old and if Prince Fluffy XXIV never ever produced cataracts he should be noted as well even if he was barely recognizable as a Cavalier and no one should be ridiculed for stating their opinions.
Terrie:) JEANIE MONTFORD wrote: > Well terrie perhaps some who may have > A) the knowledge > B) are not normally secretive > are too intimidated to post their choices to the list for fear that whatever > they say may be ridiculed or attacked................ > Among my choices for general excellence (NOT necessarily for "tested" > progeny as when some of these dogs were around people didn't test like now) ========================================================= "Magic Commands": to stop receiving mail for awhile, click here and send the email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20NOMAIL to start it up gain click here: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?body=SET%20CKCS-L%20MAIL E-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] for assistance. Search the Archives... http://apple.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ckcs-l.html All e-mail sent through CKCS-L is Copyright 1999 by its original author.
