(11-10-2013 08:14 AM)Kayleigh McMillan Wrote: (11-10-2013 07:18 AM)anna acanthus Wrote: Good grief man ! get yourself a life instead of spamming half cocked "knowledge" here all day every day.
And also often being snide, rude and condescending to some who's only fault has been asking some beginner's question, or to others who dare venture give some advice or information here. This is everybody's forum, not just yours.
Get off our backs, go play with yourself, or whatever …
PS. Sorry Ophelia for hi-jacking your thread in this way.
ROFL Anna is that you? 
I think Anna is right though it shouldn't be discouraged to investigate the possibility size has some other logic behind it than we know now without blowing that option away up front.
I think it is random from what I have seen now but I'm certainly interested in other theories that may lead to other conclusions.
But most of all we are all customers of KittyCatS! And pay good money for these furballs and that alone gives us the right to experience breeding in our own way.
Speaking of discovering things besides traits I'd love to have a new puzzle brought to our cats!
I love plotting.
Anna You go GIRL! So unless someone wants to come clean and admit they have seen all the scripts at work here..................... Kay I agree too, which is why I posted what I did.
It is entirely possible that it is in the genetic "code" that if size = teacup chances of offspring 'not' normal size is higher%. Were as a trait would be trait=300 offspring trait would be > than 300 or if starter ping kitty god and pick random based on percentage of request (pleas) received today.
All in the genetics so unless you want to share your "concrete" proof of that code it's all in observing your lineages and results of what is made public by others that do the same.
