Just like finding a trustworthy babysitter, choosing a responsible dog sitter is a personal decision that requires a lot of due diligence.

One dog owner was looking for a diamond in the "ruff" as she sought out a dog sitter for her furry friend, Zero. Taking to social media, the woman shared her list of requirements for a potential pet sitter, according to The Mirror.

However, the internet thought her list was "insane" and slammed her for trying to take advantage.

In her social media post, the woman explained she was looking for someone to take care Zero for a week. While she didn't include how much she was willing to pay, she was very clear about the 11 rules the sitter would have to follow as part of the gig.

"Looking for an incredibly trustworthy person to walk and feed Zero next week," she wrote, adding: "Must love dogs. Must love Zero."

"Must be able to walk him 3-4 times a day, be able to feed him twice a day," she continued, adding the sitter "must already be acclimated to Zero."

The sitter would also have to "be able to hold a roughly 130–140-pound dog pulling intensely on a leash because he gets excited over dogs and people."

"Must be able to provide open communication about when you arrive, walk/feed him, and leave," she continued. "Must spam my cell with photos. Must leave our personal belongings A-L-O-N-E."

Her last two rules were deemed especially questionable: "Must sign a written agreement," she continued, adding the chosen dog sitter must also "agree that you will be held liable if anything happens to Zero or our home and belongings."

Though asking for a pet sitter to care about the pet they're watching and be available for walks and feedings seem like reasonable requests, eyebrows were raised by the woman's insistence that the pet sitter sign a contract and be held responsible for items in her home.

According to The Mirror, one commenter raised a valid question: "Leave our stuff alone so you don't know just how much s--t is already broken that we will claim worked like new and you are now responsible for?"

"They are legitimately looking for someone to scam," another person speculated. "Best case scenario, the 'damages' you caused will magically be covered by whatever payment you agreed to. They will claim it's worse than that but will call it even."

Other readers seemed to agree.

"True, that seems like a great way to scam their way out of any payment (if they were even planning on offering any, I can't tell)," one commenter weighed in.

"They actually just turned someone down who offered to watch the dog at their own apartment, so it's looking even more like that could be the case," someone responded.

"Also, I see no mention of payment? They're looking for an unpaid volunteer or what?" another user wrote.

Do you think the woman was trying to scam potential pet sitters? Let PopCrush know by connecting with us on Facebook or Twitter.

Celebrities Accused of Terrible Crimes