Last night I posted a Q in Animals & Nature, about the tragic story of a starving dog that had eaten its dead companion (another dog) because their owners had not fed them for several weeks.
The owner of the dogs claimed she could not afford to buy food for the dogs, and this led her to leave them to starve to death.
I asked if there was ever a good enough reason to leave your animals to starve to death.
I have just logged on and found 15 emails from AB, telling me I have replies to my question. But I cannot see the replies, as my question has been banned. Anyone know why this question would have been banned please?
Sometimes blocking can be triggered by key words - these are both chosen by forum moderators, and built into the software they are using. perhaps the reitieration of 'dead' triggered an alert about weirdness. Don't take it personally, it's just machines doing their best. And no, there is never an excuse for betraying the trust of an animal who regards you as its god.
if it has been banned, it will still be in your profile but it will have a pink banner above it saying 'this question is banned'.
if it has been removed from the site that is.
BTW, noone should have trouble affording to feed their pets, I have two dogs and a cat, the dogs cost me about �22 a month in good including mixer and the cat costs me 11.88 a month , i buy asda's own tinned dog food and their mixer and their tinned cat food.
The woman was just mentally ill, it is pathetic