Originally Posted by kellymcdonald78
And I would posit that these are all examples of "bad etiquette". You know, the question that the original poster added. In case you need a reminder, "etiquette is the set of written and unwritten rules (emphasis mine) of conduct that make social interactions run more smoothly.". He didn't ask "what he could get away with", or if "he would get kicked out for bringing his dog", but what is the general etiquette. Based on the fact that the largest national operator of huts, does specifically prohibit dogs from their facilities, I stand by my response. The general etiquette is to not bring pets. Just as I would advise that smoking inside, playing death metal, and (as what discussed here last year) and bringing your 3 months old, is not the proper etiquette of hut usage
However its perfectly OK for you to "impose" your preferences on everyone else because? Again, as I mentioned before, for every "ass hat" rule maker, there is an "ass hat" do whatever I want without consideration of anyone else.
i) I realize this discussion has extended beyond the pale of the OP's original question. I think he's had his question answered. As John inferred, some people REALLY don't like dogs at huts and aren't afraid to say so.
ii) I'm not disagreeing that you might think that these constitute poor etiquette. Personally, I agree that these all suck. All I'm saying is if this is your list, that other guy hates different things, and his buddy different things again. That couple from Argentina over there? They hate different things from you too. The gang of guys here on a stag? Different stuff. The 6th grade field trip with 4 exhausted parent chaperones? Totally different stuff. And any and all might happen in a public hut, just like a bus stop or parking lot or any public place. The point is, just because you're
not a fan of dogs doesn't mean that the owners are jerks for bringing a dog where one is allowed. It's not just about you and your needs.
If you take it as fact that some people that stay in huts also like dogs, and that there are whole many (and diverse) huts that specifically disallow dogs, it stands to reason that these hut users will likely
honour the wishes of the non-dog huts and use the huts without specific no-dog policies, as they can. As such, if you're visiting a hut without a specific no-dog policy/rule, it's fair to say that you may run into a party with a dog, and regardless of your personal preferences, they have every right to be there as well. One could as well argue that it's poor etiquette to discriminate against the dog owner, when they're allowed to be there as much as you. It's not them choosing to "impose", they're allowed
to be there, assuming they're being responsible for their dog. Don't like dogs? As mentioned, stay at an ACC hut, or book your destination out. Or stay wherever, and suck it up when you have to, like everyone does.
Now if you're at an ACC hut and someone has their dog inside, have at 'er. Your stand-by response will be appropriate, and likely welcome.
iii) I would say your last paragraph could easily apply both ways, and might also be called bad etiquette. It's more than a little ironic to be demanding consideration when offering none. And thanks for the definition of etiquette, I had no idea
. It would be easy to make any difference of opinion a issue of "etiquette" if you push it to unrealistic ends.