To think parents should take responsibility if children chase sheep on country walk?

[Firethorn]

Recently went for a country walk (public right of way across farmland) with SIL, my 2 nieces, and another couple and their 3 kids. Crossing a sheep-field, the 5 kids started chasing sheep, trying to 'round them up' in a flock like they'd seen sheepdogs do on TV. I asked SIL if we should stop them, she said no they always do this it's not doing any harm. Other couple agreed and said the kids are having fun, let them play with the sheep. I was a bit concerned as one child was carrying a stick and waving it around, but respected the parents' decision.
Shortly afterwards an irate farmer marched towards us shouting and swearing! She was really aggressive and had a snarling dog (off the lead), dog was circling us but not approaching. For about 5 minutes mins she yelled and swore at the kids for chasing her sheep. All 3 parents then turned on their kids and told them off, lying that they'd been telling them to stop but they'd disobeyed! (They hadn't told them to stop at any point). My niece burst into tears and hid behind me and I lost my temper with farmer for swearing at kids, told her to back off and stop shouting, and to get dog under control. The dad of one of other kids then threatened to kick the dog if it came near his kids, and after some more shouting we decided to go back way we'd come. She shouted abuse after us until we were out of sight!

I'm annoyed with other parents for letting their kids chase sheep then lying about trying to stop them! Also with farmer for being so intimidating and rude. SIL says we should just have apologised and carried on walking. AIBU?

It is used just as much to reply positively to people.

guidlines are just that, how people interpret them are a different matter. Im just saying I'd rather be kind and use the bold to highlight something positive rather than something negative.

Of course it's a neutral convention. Saying anything else is ludicrous.

Well do as you please then, and let other people get on with the way they use the posting norms.

With respect ilovesooty I'm just saying that people on here can sometimes forget that there is a human being behind every post and highlighting can sometimes be unkind, so a bit more thought could be put into it.

Oh, yes Puttingoutfire this reminds me of the film The Shooting Party and the quiet exchange between the Lord played by James Mason and the activist played by Sir John Geilgud, when the latter is protesting against the shooting of birds and they have a very amenable exchange after James Mason says "and we give them life". After which JG rolls up his placard and bides him "good day".

One thing the ISS astronauts say when they roll over the Earth is how green and beautiful Britain and Ireland look. It is a different green to everywhere else. It is not there by accident.

Is someone's name a negative then?

I'm as confused as fuck by this "revelation" and I can't even blame alcholol!

i think that we all know when we use it and im just saying to use it far more wisely.

How patronising.

Crocodopolis This is one of those surreal MN moments where the theme of a thread is echoed within it and it gets derailed and take off in a different direction. A convention is questioned, an explanation patiently offered but the questioner refuses to accept the advice. I am sure I have come across this somewhere else recently...

at bolding names being rude

Patronising? why on earth is what i say patronising? What on earth is wrong with taking a check on yourself and being kind rather than not caring what you say.

Guilty as charged then

Croco it's more like an orgy IYSWIM? Sorry if the bold offended you

It's not being unkind to put someone's name in bold. It makes it easier for them to see they are being addressed FFS!

Every other forum I have ever been on allows you to very easily directly quote a post and poster...

She said there are never any lambs in that field so thinks they are all male sheep

Hilarious. Does she realise that if her children had behaved like that around a flock of rams they would have had considerably worse to contend with than a shouting farmer and a dog?

Im not saying it isnt allowed at all. Im saying people should think why they're doing it.

op you have the same curious emotional effect on me as Jersey Clarkson. I don't know whether to loathe you for your stupidity and arrogance or to give you grudging respect for having calculated how to wind me up even further with each successive utterance.

OP, why can you and your SIL not get it through your heads that your nieces' conduct would have been just as reprehensible even if the sheep were not pregnant? You talk about them "harmlessly playing around the sheep" but the reality is that they were chasing them, they will have been shouting and calling to each other, and one was waving a stick. That is not harmless. Would your SIL like it if someone did that to her children?

How dare you bring shame on this celebration of sheep!

A flock of male sheep that didn't ram (hence the name) the little darlings. oh your sil is the stupid gift that keeps on giving. I bet her precious children had nappies that smelt of roses and the sun shines from their bottoms.

time and time again on here I see it being done in a negative cruel way, im just saying that people need to think before they do it. I really don't see why there's some sort of "outcry" going on here because I have an opinion

I'm sorry christy I think this exists solely in your head. Most people use bold to alert the attention of the person not to start a row. Doubtlessly there are nearly threads with the intended recipient's name in bold and equally lovely fluffy posts that do the same. The bold is neither here or there. It is like saying commas are a hostile gesture.

What you are experiencing is conformation bias.

christycreme, people are simply not agreeing with your opinion and are citing evidence in support of their disagreement. That isn't an outcry, and they have every right to disagree.

Or confirmation bias!