Poll: should there be a ban on discussion of ISR Old. NA vs. GOV on the SHB forum? [Archive]

Cartier

Oct. 4, 2003, 09:29 AM

One of the problems have with this poll, other that the obvious bias presented in the phraseology of the question itselfâ€¦ is that anyone can vote on this issue based upon personalities and cliques.

The only people who should be voting on this issue are people who are impacted by this issueâ€¦people who own and breed Oldenburg horses. I think that people with no material interest in the issue should stay out of it.

Think about it this way, if a group of us Oldenburg owners and breeders were at a Breed Show, sitting around discussing Sport horse breeding in this country and the important issues that seriously impact American Oldenburg breeders, would we allow someone to come running over from the Hunter Show across the street to say the kinds of things weâ€™ve read here like:

â€œWow! I don't even know anything about Sport Horse Breeding.
I just heard about Cartier's posting over here and decided to check it out.
I don't care to ever get involved in these breeding issues.
Too much trouble, IMHOâ€¦
I donâ€™t own Oldenburg Horses at all and never intend toâ€¦
There is only one dark chocolate that I like - See's Raspberry.MMMMMMM. Other than that, I prefer milk chocolate with caramel and/or nougat. Nuts and chews is my favorite See's candy assortment box. I don't like Godiva, though, blech.
Cartier, it seems like no one likes you here - why don't you go play elsewhere?â€

Mature intelligent adults donâ€™t act like the posters weâ€™ve seen recently. Many of these groupies are new, or they have no public profile, for all we know they are the same few people posting again and again under various names. We should be required to stick to facts and issues and be civil... there are important issues at stake.

[This message was edited by Cartier on Oct. 04, 2003 at 12:55 PM.]

Everythingbutwings

Oct. 4, 2003, 09:32 AM

When the same individuals repeatedly beat the subject into the ground a five day suspension would have no effect.

A discussion is worthwhile, a personal vendetta using the COTH forums as a public shouting block is not discussing an issue, it is insistent and annoying.

If these people are so sure they are right, why don't they write letters to the editor of the COTH and other pertinent outlets to get their message across?

As much as they say that the warring factions have been kept in the dark, why do so MANY of us here understand the situation? We have seen the catfight reinacted over and over to no end.

Warmbloods.net and their own registries don't allow the bickering, why allow the fight to get carried on over here?

As many of us are aware, "troublemakers" who bring up taboo topics are banned from COTH. Why should the rule be different for those few Oldenburg warriors who insist on beating this particular dead horse?

Friendship is Love without his wings
-Lord Byron

alexandra

Oct. 4, 2003, 09:36 AM

I have to agree with Spectrum. As long as people behave themselves, why should a discussion not be allowed? I e.g. did only know the German side. Very emotional of course. Now I learned a lot from this forum, the problems that the existence of the two or even more O registries in your country are causing and so on. On the other hand I believe I could give or at least tried to give input why this discussion is always emotional at this side of the pont and maybe give people an idea why even some people in the US also take that "problem" very seriously and emotional. Discussions help people to understand. I learned a lot of things on this forum about topics I had no idea I would be interested in e.g. about the very rare color of Parlello or however they are spelled. ;-) (By the way: a lot of humour in that thread !)
I would definetly agree to the few days ban from the forum (I have no idea whether this is included in the moderators toolbox and whether keeping track on who was already on a five day ban or not would be possible.)
But still a good idea to cool down some people and their posts. But these troublemakers are also troublemakers in real life and you cannot help them anyway. I know a forum where there is only linited access to the topics on Oldenburg and I also know that some of the posters here don't have the keyword to post or read. Since that time the discussions there are much better... But in my eyes not the best solution because now people who are new to the topic never learn anything about it. And most people are clever enough to see who is posting b...sh.t and who is writing well thought opinions... People are old enough to make their own decisions. But they have to remain polite and shouldn't attack personally.

Alexandra

I am not responsible for spelling misstacks - just my PC

http://alexandra-fischer.privat.t-online.de

[This message was edited by alexandra on Oct. 04, 2003 at 12:45 PM.]

talloaks

Oct. 4, 2003, 10:01 AM

I think discussions are a wonderful way to learn!! My God, where would be be without civil discourse?? This is a breeding forum, therefore the discussions should be around the breeding of horses. There are many breeds and registries in the US and world wide, and these forums are read world wide, this is the age of the world wide web!!! The ISR/OLDNA I believe is the largest warmblood registry in the US and one of the first, after the AHS pershaps, well really I don't know who started the first, I remember when Emil Jung brought the Holsteiners to VA, but never the less, there are a lot of people who breed with the ISR/OLDNA and a lot that bred with the GOV's branch here which is OBHS??? not sure of their title now without finding their site.

The thing is, this is an important subject for a lot of people and every year there are more and more breeders entering the registries, and more and more people are buying our horses and want to get involved. When they are performance people they want all the year end awards or opportunities to acquire year end awards etc for their efforts. Just as breeders have discussed on other threads how they would like to receive recognition when their offspring have gone on to accomplish show awards/championships/year end awards etc.

We should, here in America anyway, (what does America stand for??) be able to openingly discuss the merits, history, present and future plans of registeris. It would be very un-American to forbid the discourse of a couple of warmblood registries!! If you think you should limit the discussion of two particular registries, then why permit the discussion of any of the other breed associations or registries.

I think the idea of excluding such discussion is very damgerous!! Just the fact of the idea that one BB which is supported by a horse magazine, COTH, should ban horse discussions, is walking on the very edge!!! Very surprizing that the suggestion should ever have become a topic.

Now things that can be excluded from discourse is the mocking of a certain poster couple, by about 40 or so posters I have counted just on one thread.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Rule #1: Be nice, be respectful, be polite. Disagreement and discussion are fine; flaming and personal attacks are not.

Rule #2: The board is to discuss issues, not individuals. Leave names and specifics out whenever possible. Don't name names unless what you're saying has been documented as fact in court or in print somewhere (bulletin boards don't count!) and you can back your statements up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I have noticed that numerous posts by those mocking have been in violation of both rule #1 and rule #2 and nothing has been done in their violation, except the moderator has actually encouraged it.

So I sincerely believe that the ISR/OLDNA and GOV discussion should go on. I believe the very rules of American discourse are challenged here.

"There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man." Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

www.talloaksfarm.net (http://www.talloaksfarm.net)

Bugs-n-Frodo

Oct. 4, 2003, 10:34 AM

While I believe the information in some of these threads is important, for those of us who are not currently breeding or buying Olds, it is very disconcerting. It is diffcult to figure out what is factual and what is the opinion of the poster. There is so much bickering going on between posters that it is difficult to learn anything. If someone were to be intrested in the OLD breed, and logged on to COTH for some research, they may well be turned off by the Oldenburg breed itself because of the controversy. I know from experience that these organizations are not the only breed organizations going through controversy, when you have people, you have opinions, naturally. I am new to breeding and I have found my breeding experience to be very informative and the breeders to be very nice and very helpful. When I see this kind of bickering going on, I question whether on or not I really want to get into the industry. I believe in breed loyalty and that we should promote our breed (s) of choice, but the arguing on these threads is not support. There is nothing wrong with saying "I like ISR Old. NA vs GOV because..." but I don't think beating a dead horse is going to get anywhere. These threads almost always deteriorate into personal attacks and arguements.

"The only people who should be voting on this issue are people who are impacted by this issueâ€¦people who own and breed Oldenburg horses. I think that people with no material interest in the issue should stay out of it."

BTW, does the fact that I don't have and Old. and don't breed Old. preclude me from learning about the breed? My trainer has an Old. stallion she is bringing along which is what has prompted my curiosity. I don't think that is a very fair statement.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amy
Owned by:
Cute as a Bugsear (Bugs) JC OTTTB (Isella x Annie Somebody)
Pippen (Frodo) ATA Anglo Trakehner (Paramoure x Cute as a Bugsear)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

elizabeth Callahan

Oct. 4, 2003, 10:36 AM

A discussion is just that, a discussion. If it is polite and respectful, it should be allowed. Freedom of speech and all that. If you don't want to read it, don't go to that topic. Simple as that.

Whitehedge Farm

Oct. 4, 2003, 11:30 AM

Nobody is being FORCED to read or participate in these threads. I dont understand why you would ban it- if the subject matter is that upsetting to people- just DONT READ IT- simple as that. There are plenty of other subjects to read about on COTH BB. If certain people want to go on and on and make themselves look silly (and or rude)- so be it!

sketcher

Oct. 4, 2003, 11:36 AM

I even find the posts regarding this topic interesting for a variety of reasons - one being that I am often able to distinguish between people I would and would not do business with based on the way they handle themselves on this topic.

I am constantly amazed by the unprofessionalism of some of the people and am glad to see it displayed here before I have forked over some cold, hard cash in a business deal...

Celebrity

Oct. 4, 2003, 11:50 AM

I don't see a problem with having these discussions as long as people have a little bit of respect for one another...Many of us have horses that belong to either (including myself). Maybe we don't need to dicuss on a "vs" basis.. cause we all know that will cause arguments...We all just need to realize where the line should be drawn during heated discussions and if someone feels the need to target specific members it should be done through PT's NOT on the public board.

Holsteiner Clique!
http://home.cogeco.ca/~patm/NOVA2.htm

talloaks

Oct. 4, 2003, 12:10 PM

Sketcher, I would have to agree with you that after all of these threads I have noticed people /posters with attitudes that I would never like owners of my horses to possess. Personalities and the inward qualities of people do come through in their postings on these threads, but that is not reason to eliminate free public civil discourse. Those are the things we can privately deal with off the public forums, whether through PT, email or just no comment which is probably the best way to handle it. Emotions get raging, but it is up to each one individually to control themselves as if they were in public. Just because it is the printed word instead of a public podium, one should be careful not to make fools out of themselves. Remember a word uttered is gone, you cannot change it, it is gone for all to hear. Do not send daggers!!! A kind reply works wonders. After all you can catch more bees with honey than you can with vinegar.

"There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man." Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

www.talloaksfarm.net (http://www.talloaksfarm.net)

Sportpony

Oct. 4, 2003, 12:21 PM

I am another of the posters who does not object to the discussions ... for several of the reasons already stated:

1) If it gets too nasty and ridiculous, I don't have to read any more in that particular thread ... seems pretty simple to me, don't like it, don't read it.

2) Additionally, any discussion which gets extremely heated gives me a pretty good basis for screening out people I would or would not choose to do business with by looking at "attitudes" ... I simply cannot deal comfortably with people who (even figuratively) stand on soapboxes and rant.

Kaleidoscope Farm
http://www.stallionstation.com/kaleidoscopefarm
Colored sporthorses & sportponies for non-traditional riders

CuriousGeorge

Oct. 4, 2003, 12:24 PM

"The only people who should be voting on this issue are people who are impacted by this issueâ€¦people who own and breed Oldenburg horses. I think that people with no material interest in the issue should stay out of it."

ROTFLOLPIMP! Cartier, are you going to call Rob over this, too, and make us all send notarized affadavits certifying what breeds of horses we have before we can participate on this BB? What a crock!

My vote is for banning. The interested parties have obviously identified themselves and aligned along their factions. If in the future new members ask about GOV v. ISR, we point them toward old threads (Mein Gott in Himmel we have enough of them!) or discuss privately via email or private topics.

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif On the other hand we could just ban the people who continually feel the need to discuss this issue in an inflammatory manner, and allow the "normal" people to do whatever they want.

Erin

Oct. 4, 2003, 12:35 PM

In theory, I would agree with everyone who says that we should be able to discuss any subject, as long as it is civil and stays within the rules.

However, it's the "civil" part that has historically been a problem with the Oldenburg registry discussions. And quite frankly, the moderators are sick of dealing with it. We do not enjoy feeling tied to our computers whenever the subject comes up, because we know it's only a matter of time before the discussion turns ugly.

Worse still, certain parties involved in these threads make threats every time they dislike something one of the moderators does. In fact, on a previous Oldenburg thread, I deleted a post that violated the rules... I believe it was either too personal, or contained allegations of something illegal. I don't remember which. But it was deleted within minutes of being posted, because I happened to be at my computer at the time. Still, the party who was being denigrated in the post emailed me and complained, making vague threats of lawsuits... I suppose the only thing that would make this person happy is if I were clairvoyant and deleted the posts that violate rules BEFORE they appear?

This is a policy change that has been under consideration for quite a long time. And has been noted on other threads, these Oldenburg discussions have been directly responsible for the closing of other forums. This isn't a problem that is unique to COTH.

This is a free forum. You are not required to pay anything to play here. So if a certain subject becomes more trouble that it is worth -- both in terms of COTH time and resources and moderators' time and sanity -- then I'm not sure that COTH has any obligation to allow discussion of that topic to continue.

Hence, the poll... to find out if the people who read this forum really DO find discussion of the topic to be of value. If people were overwhelmingly in favor of allowing discussion to continue, then perhaps that would outweigh the trouble that the topics cause to COTH.

For those of you who are relatively new, I'd like to direct your attention to the "NGB Dispute" forum. The issue of the AHSA vs. the USET -- obviously a topic of VAST importance to almost the entire sport horse industry -- was discussed here at GREAT length.

Those threads, however, stayed civil. I don't recall ever having to close any of them.

Everythingbutwings

Oct. 4, 2003, 01:03 PM

That is it in a nutshell.

Civil discussion. No one has to agree with everyone else in order to get along but the Oldenburg wars have been and are continuing to be notorious.

The members of the COTH forums have learned much about a number of subjects through civil discussions since the COTH started these message boards. Unfortunately, most of what we have all learned about Oldenburgs are that some of the people involved have their undies in a bundle, aren't achieving satisfaction through dealing with their registries and are screaming UNFAIR in every FREE forum available.

AND when censured, turn their bitter bickering on to the very forum that they recently used as their shouting box.

It will be interesting to see how this poll turns out next week when the majority of the members are back checking in.

I personally hate the idea of banning topics but this situatation has become one that truly is unfair to those Oldenburg owners/breeders who participate usefully on this and other forums as well as to the forum moderators and host. Another instance of a few bad apples spoiling it for the majority. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Friendship is Love without his wings
-Lord Byron

Layne Farm

Oct. 4, 2003, 01:29 PM

sketcher
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> I even find the posts regarding this topic interesting for a variety of reasons - one being that I am often able to distinguish between people I would and would not do business with based on the way they handle themselves on this topic.

I am constantly amazed by the unprofessionalism of some of the people and am glad to see it displayed here before I have forked over some cold, hard cash in a business deal... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Very well said! SINCE I OWN A OLDDENBURG I WOULD LIKE THIS TO BE A OPEN TOPIC AND TALKED ABOUT LIKE ADULTS!

CuriousGeorge
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Cartier, are you going to call Rob over this, too, and make us all send notarized affadavits certifying what breeds of horses we have before we can participate on this BB? What a crock <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
This is why this topic has problems. You and your BUllDOGS who we all know who you are can not act like adults and leave personal crap out of it. Like the 1st quote I would love to know who your farm is and what dealings you have with this subject beacuse I would never Do buisness with you or anyone that can not handle them selves like adultshttp://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Erin here is your chance with personal crap BAN the people from the topic that act like that not the ones who can brings facts to the table and teach and help everyone learn about the 2 diffrent regs. And please dear god if this turns into choclate I will pukehttp://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Ashley
http://www.yandafarms.com

fullmoon fever

Oct. 4, 2003, 01:29 PM

I did not reply to the poll because I do not have an Oldenburg and do not feel it is my place to vote on this issue.

On the other hand, after having read through the pages of posts about the ISR vs. GOV issues, I will never consider buying an Oldenburg. To say I have been turned off the breed by the breeders here is an understatement.

Founder of the Olde Farte Clique; Member of the Dented Thigh Clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
If it ain't tack shopping, it's a waste of time and money.

pintofoal

Oct. 4, 2003, 01:42 PM

Well, I voted Yes to ban it...I am all for freedom of speech, I am in both organizations, I want my breeders to understand that there are two, I see nothing wrong with discussing the two registries...BUT, I've seen it time and time again (only on the Internet) where the reason for discussing it isn't for education purposes, but to do nothing more then to cause trouble and anger.Â* Yet what I find even more appalling and becoming more and more prevalent is that people would use us, this forum and this subject for their own "personal agenda" whether it be to make one of the registries look bad or using us/the info here to try and build a law suit to sue the pants off of someone.Â* We hear it over and over on the forums: "I know I never want an Oldenburg after seeing all this" etc. Gee I wonder why?, sure does seem like it is hurting our market place, but who is doing the damage?Â* It's not because of either ISR/OLD NA or GOV or the fact that there are two Oldenburg registries but because of how people conduct themselves on forums (and I'm not talking about the chocolate posts) and again I feel many times it is for their own personal gain and we are being "harvested" so to speak, quite frankly I don't like seeing the forum/posters being "used" in this way.Â*

I see no problem is discussing one or the other but NOT BOTH at the same time, in other words if someone wants to say "Hey we just got back from our Iinspection and it was great, but I don't understand my scores" or "tell me about Oldenburgs in the young horse futurity" wonderful, type away, but this head to head, war of the Roses stuff gets NOWHERE and it's NOT just a matter of "skipping the post and not reading it if you don't like it" it is beyond tiring -- it HURTS my business, it makes those who do read this stuff NOT WANT TO DEAL WITH OLDENBURG BREEDERS/MEMBERS (or what they perceive as being such from the forums)--It's not because of the split or that there are two, both the registries are great to work with , both ISR/OLD NA GOV horses are great, both the ISR/OLD NA people you meet in "real life" at shows/inspections are usually wonderful/nice and it's not because of "confusion in our marketplace" but because people don't want to deal with the people involved (you and me) because of the behavior in these "discussions" WE are the ones who look bad!, because of how these posts always seem to have an ugly undertone.

Let me ask those of you who have made such a statement as the one mentioned above and following; "I wouldn't want an Oldenburg after reading this forum" Why? is it because of: A) the behavior of "Oldenburg" people on forums and you'd be scared to meet them in a dark alley B) because you are confused about Oldenburgs and it makes your head spin C) because of the "split" of the registries, you just can't choose D) because you raise Dutch, Hans, TB's or whatevers and everything else is junk

If someone asks "Why are there two Oldenburg Registries?" or a similar question I think the thread should get a quick: "please check the archives (or better yet compile all that "stuff " in a neat and tidy folder for them) and to contact the registries, here are their emails" and then lock it down baby! Â* If there is some new "major turn of events" with the currently relationship of ISR/OLD NA - GOV then yes OK let's discuss it, but all these "current" postings info happened YEARS and YEARS ago, it's water under the bridge that has made it to the ocean at this point! There are no current changes and all the past stuff has been discussed to death, again if someone new wants the info, they can do a little research and have days and days of it to read, or those who feel they are in the know or want to spout off about which is better, more righteous, has better horses--PT them.

Liz Hall silverwoodfarm.com (http://silverwoodfarm.com)
Pinto & Colored Warmbloods Stallions

siegi b.

Oct. 4, 2003, 01:59 PM

I think there has been enough discussion of the ISR Old. NA vs. GOV issue to provide plenty of material to the person really trying to gain insight. Amazingly enough, the people that are most insistent that the COTH BB continue to provide space for this discussion as also the people that will use this forum as their personal vehicle for disseminating their own myopic view regarding the subject. As Erin stated, these folks also are quick to threaten legal action if their opinion is not accepted, and don't hesitate to become verbally combative.
This BB would be a much nicer place without all the bickering generated by these people, so my vote is to discontinue this discussion.

Chocolatier

Oct. 4, 2003, 02:12 PM

Liz very good post and right to the point, as were many of the others.

I wonder if maybe a moratorium for a period of time would be helpful...say to calm posters down without having to ban the topic all together.

It is very regrettable that this issue has become the issue.

"If I eat equal amounts of dark chocolate and white chocolate, is that
a balanced diet?"

fullmoon fever

Oct. 4, 2003, 02:51 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by pintofoal:
Let me ask those of you who have made such a statement as the one mentioned above and following; "I wouldn't want an Oldenburg after reading this forum" Why? is it because of: A) the behavior of "Oldenburg" people on forums and you'd be scared to meet them in a dark alley B) because you are confused about Oldenburgs and it makes your head spin C) because of the "split" of the registries, you just can't choose D) because you raise Dutch, Hans, TB's or whatevers and everything else is junk

Liz Hall http://silverwoodfarm.com
Pinto & Colored Warmbloods Stallions<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A) I'm not particularly afraid of meeting anyone in a dark alley, but the vocal few that I've "met" here have completely put me off wanting to meet any of them in person. All the back-stabbing and bitching is a complete bore.

B) I am confused, but if I were interested, I'm sure I could get clarification and/or figure it out.

C) Haven't bothered to check either out since it's a moot point for me.

D) I do raise horses that are not eligible for Oldenburg approval, BUT, due to A), I wouldn't even think of breeding/buying one.

The mere mention of Oldenburg has me running screaming at this point. If the postings on this bb are the example of the people I would have to deal with; a big no thank you!

Founder of the Olde Farte Clique; Member of the Dented Thigh Clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
If it ain't tack shopping, it's a waste of time and money.

Cartier

Oct. 4, 2003, 03:05 PM

Liz,

You have a personal stake in this... and so do weâ€¦ and so do hundreds/thousands of other American breeders of Oldenburg horses. Your business interests are NOT more (or less) important than anyone elses. The issues weâ€™ve discussed impact the market value of American bred Oldenburg horses.

You wrote above that â€œthe reason for discussing it isn't for education purposes, but to do nothing more then to cause trouble and anger.â€

It is patently absurd for you to claim to know why someone else posts. You are speculating and then asserting that your speculation is fact. I could speculate about why you postâ€¦ but such speculations should remain in private because they are only guesses.

The issues involved directly impact our market place. There is information in these threads which has never been discussed, and this information goes well beyond the â€œwhat happened at my inspection type of post.â€

As for locking the thread on the â€œother forum,â€ the woman who owns that forum imports and sells horses from one of the Oldenburg registries. That, in and of itself is not necessarily a good or a bad thingâ€¦ but it MIGHT give her a reason to wish to control the flow of information.

Firefly

Oct. 4, 2003, 03:40 PM

I like the idea of a moratorium. I think a heck of a lot of us are pretty tired of a certain poster's persistent harping on this topic. Her entire life seems to revolve around her personal beef with GOV, and since she (by her own admission) cannot work due to some sort of "medical disability", she apparently has nothing else to do but spend countless hours in front of the computer, whining and complaining about GOV and how they "done her wrong." She accuses GOV of causing confusion and dissension in the marketplace, but her own continual b****ing on these forums has caused so much dissonance that a lot of posters are now saying they will NEVER consider an Oldenburg of any kind. SO ENOUGH ALREADY - THE POOR HORSE (OLDENBURG OR NOT) IS DEAD!

Tiffany's

Oct. 4, 2003, 03:44 PM

Cartier,

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>One of the problems have with this poll, other that the obvious bias presented in the phraseology of the question itselfâ€¦ is that anyone can vote on this issue based upon personalities and cliques.

The only people who should be voting on this issue are people who are impacted by this issueâ€¦people who own and breed Oldenburg horses. I think that people with no material interest in the issue should stay out of it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Goodness gracious, woman.

Once you and your esteemed husband threatened legal action against COTH, the issue became even more unwieldy than the issues between the registries. That your threat baffled many of us on this BB is a given - but of greater concern is the implications it may have on the spirit and mere existence of this BB, a place where many do find and derive information, comfort, kinship, amusement.

At the core, you threatened not only the COTH - but all of us. That you and your husband would further compound the insult with veiled allusions to 'discussions' with the editor and publisher only fuels that particular fire - and explains largely the mockery directed at you and your husband.

It's not the battle between the registries that threatens your business - it's your conduct.

It's not the moderators who harbor a hidden agenda - it's you.

It's not the tension between the registries that dismays us, it's a combination of all of the above.

Due to all of the above, and like many of you, thanks to some of your 'efforts', my trainer has been given a list of breeders with whom he is forbidden to deal and instructed to avoid the breed altogether. Now whose fault is that? I'll give you a hint: it ain't the ISR/NOA/GOV, the moderators or COTH.

Layne Farm

Oct. 4, 2003, 03:51 PM

Tiffany's
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Due to all of the above, and like many of you, thanks to some of your 'efforts', my trainer has been given a list of breeders with whom he is forbidden to deal and instructed to avoid the breed altogether. Now whose fault is that? I'll give you a hint: it ain't the ISR/NOA/GOV, the moderators or COTH <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not to get into this but I had to laugh that you would allow your Trainer to tell you what BReed oF horse you can BUYhttp://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif) http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sleepy.gif

Ashley
http://www.yandafarms.com

Dr. Cartier

Oct. 4, 2003, 03:55 PM

Tiffany... about your post...

A while back Firefly called my wife a whore who works for the ISRâ€¦ As a factual matter she is not a whore and dosnâ€™t worked for ISR. WE felt such a post was defamatory and should be removedâ€¦ COTH originally disagreed, then later agreed. There is no lawsuit against COTH.

mY WIFE has over 1100 of which probably 100 even address any issue of the GOV.

~~Ignorance creates a vacuum that must be filled~~

SoEasy

Oct. 4, 2003, 03:56 PM

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE

can we have ONE thread with the word Oldenburg in it that is NOT full of personal attacks? They are against the BB rules. Period.

Spectrum

Oct. 4, 2003, 04:10 PM

I consider myself to be virtually impartial where the GOV-ISR split is concerned. I perhaps work with one more than the other, but I got involved in breeding after the split, so I really had no stake in the issue when it occurred.

I try to read as many of the posts on these threads as possible, in order to keep up to date on the discussion. As such, I would like to make a few observations on what has caused problems with these threads from my viewpoint.

1. I have no idea what started the flame war towards Cartier in previous threads, and I am fairly disgusted with all the people denigrating this person. Yes, he/she has mentioned legal action, but geez, several people have insulted the heck out of her/him for what looks like no reason, other than that he/she protested the interruption of the discussion by the "Chocolate Brigade." Possibly there are some personal issues from outside the board that are involved with the whole process, but I really hate to see one person who has tried to be serious and polite getting constantly bashed. Even when Cartier made a joke post about calling COTH, it resulted in a flurry of insults and rude humor at his/her expense.

2. There *is* a particular individual, who does not hide her identity, who inevitably brings about the personal/nasty parts of these discussions. I have nothing against this woman, I don't know her personally, but I have observed from her posts that she INVARIABLY ends up insulting those who disagree with her in any way (on this issue and others). I have observed this woman's posts on at least three different forums, and I will say that they are often highly inflammatory and usually lead to her picking out one particular individual and insulting them excessively. Yet she never gets moderated.

3. For those of you who have decided that Oldenburg breeding is craziness based solely on these discussions, I beg you to look at the in-hand scores of all the horses at Devon this year. Oldenburgs had some of the highest scoring horses at the show- MANY of them. Yes, some of the breeders are unprofessional. So are some hanoverian and holsteiner breeders. You just can't pick them out as easily because they don't have the history the Oldenburg breeders do. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

*sigh*

I hope I have made some relevant points here.

Spectrum.

CathyKb

Oct. 4, 2003, 04:32 PM

I agree with Spectrum. I am fairly new to the forum and I have seen some really nasty comments. I have read Cartier's comments and he/she has verbally(sp) been bashed. I have no comment one way or the other on the Oldenburg situation, but I do feel the two registeries need to mend fences, for the sake of the American breeders. A good horse is a good horse not matter what the horse is branded or not branded. I have owned and still own several different breeds and each one is a great horse in my eyes. And BTW I do not like the chocolate interruptions. If you want to talk chocolate start a subject on that. I read the forum for information and we can ALL learn from others.

Oakstable

Oct. 4, 2003, 05:42 PM

I totally agree with what Liz Hall said. A very good summary of what is simply a rehash of very old issues.

Liz laid out some common sense groundrules for how the registeries can be discussed as in inspection results but no more registery vs. registery.

I happen to have one mare/foal in OV at this time. I don't want buyers to stay away from my premium foal because of the intense emotion in these unnecessary Oldenburg discussions. Let's all move on.

Oakleigh

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:19 PM

My personal opinion is that the "offending" thread was not offending. It was probably the most civil conversation we have ever had on the subject.

But, what I did find offending was the rude interruptions about chocolate. Hey, if I don't like a discussion, I just don't read it. I don't rudely interrupt it.

I did read the Dr. Cartier thread. I do not know these people, but was aghast at the incredibly rude posts on the thread. Wow. I was amazed.

I would much rather have a serious conversation on the two Oldenburgs, than have to read trivial fluff like "Do you use Show Sheen in your hair?" and "What kind of underwear do you have?". The "Help me name this foal" threads make me crazy. "Help my horse has colic" and "Help my horse is bleeding to death" make me want to kick the poster. Get off the damned computer and get out there with the vet.

I think with some rules like no personal attacks and some common sense, we could have these serious discussions. The posters who get on and make stupid comments like "with all this fighting, I will never own an Oldenburg..." are just showing their ignorance. They just can't recognize a discussion vs a fight. This was a discussion. Yes, sometimes discussions get a little hot, but as long as there is not a personal attack, it is acceptable.

And BTW, the Free Speech amendment has to do with the Government not limiting our speech. It has nothing to do with boards like this.

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

wanderlust

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:31 PM

To answer Liz's question on the previous page...

As someone who is shopping for a "husband" for one of my mares and potentially in the market for a young dressage prospect, I am not confused by the two registries. I am not particular to one registry over the other. I am not particular to one breed over another, I am simply looking for the best match for my mare and the best prospect. So the answer is "A", the behavior of these folks turns me WAY off.

In fact, of all the posters on this board who breed oldenburgs, the ONLY one I would ever consider using or buying from is Liz Hall.

BTW- those of you who think the "chocolate brigade" is rude in their efforts to keep the conversation civil... be careful how you state it, because I find it insulting (as I'm sure do the rest of the brigade members) to pick on people who are trying to avoid additional threats of lawsuits against COTH. I can assure you that you have lost at least one potential customer who would have paid you good $$$ and provided your animal with an excellent home.

Go pat yourselves on the back. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

My vote is to ban a certain posting couple permanently. Barring that, ban ANY ISR v. GOV discussion.

BTW, Oakleigh... among other things, you don't seem to understand that the reactions to the Dr. Cartier thread are due to the Cartier's history of calling up the editors and owners of COTH and threatening to sue when they don't like what they read on the boards. But of course, they can write whatever they want. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Personally, I think that is the height of rudeness.

Galileo1998

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:34 PM

Besides anything else you posted Oakleigh the comment about wanting to kick people that post "help my horse has colic" makes you want to kick them is rude and offensive. If you care to check back to May of this year I was one of those people that made a post at 10pm asking for jingles for my mare that was colicing. I had been out there with the vet since she started colicing that afternoon, I was back out there with the vet all night, I was also out there with the vet when she died at 6am. This board and the messages I got on it was a great source of comfort to me in the days after the loss of Izzie.

Oakleigh

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:42 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Master Tally:
be careful how you state it, because I find it insulting (as I'm sure do the rest of the brigade members) to pick on people who are trying to avoid additional threats of lawsuits against COTH.

BTW, Oakleigh... you don't seem to understand that the reactions to the Dr. Cartier thread are due to the Cartier's history of calling up the editors and owners of COTH and threatening to sue when they don't like what they read on the boards. But of course, they can write whatever they want. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Personally, I think that is the height of rudeness.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Master Tally,

With all due respect, it's not your job to monitor the boards and try to prevent COTH lawsuits. All you need to do is click the triangle in the lower right corner and report the thread. It's the monitor's job to watch out for COTH.

No, you are right, I may not understand or know the Cartiers. But, the postings on that thread were beyond rude. If that's not bad enough, after it was locked, a continuation of the tone of that thread has been started by another poster, Spot. If you do not like a poster or their views, just don't allow yourself to be tempted to even open the thread. It's that simple. Someone can blow off steam and nothing happens if others do not react.

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

Oakleigh

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Galileo1998:
Besides anything else you posted Oakleigh the comment about wanting to kick people that post "help my horse has colic" makes you want to kick them is rude and offensive. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, Galileo, sometimes I AM rude and offensive. I try very hard NOT to be politically correct. I am very sorry about the loss of your horse, and certainly gaining support for a loss from the board is acceptable. But, I'm not talking about you. I'm talking about the posters who get on here and discuss it while the horse is writhing in pain in the stall and they have not called the vet or are even walking the horse. You have seen those posts too.

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

wanderlust

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:56 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oakleigh:
Master Tally,

With all due respect, it's not your job to monitor the boards and try to prevent COTH lawsuits. All you need to do is click the triangle in the lower right corner and report the thread. It's the monitor's job to watch out for COTH.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No Oakleigh, it is not my job. But as someone who enjoys the free bandwith that COTH provides and appreciates the efforts of the moderators, it is something that I have no problem doing. Especially if it heads off the thread before it gets really nasty and saves the moderators some grief (or the threat of more lawsuits).

Fairview Horse Center

Oct. 4, 2003, 06:59 PM

Well, I have mares approved by both Oldenburg Registries, so I do feel I have a stake in this. Originally I voted to keep the Oldenburg threads open, and I actually commented for the first time in the most recent thread because I felt it was the most civil one I have seen. However, I would like to change my vote.

It is not anything the Oldenburg registries OR the majority of Oldenburg breeders from either registry are doing that is turning potential customers away from Oldenburg horses. Most are WONDERFUL people that are just raising the best horses they can dream of.

What is turning away lots of people is the fights by a few very visable posters. It is hurting the industry to continue, so I would vote for allowing like Liz suggested, discussion of an Inspection, or a basic question, like "What are they looking for on the triangle"? Or a brag, etc.

I like the idea of having some basic information on a permanent thread, pointing to the thread on any new topics that come up, and then locking them for the good of all Oldenburg breeders.

Darlyn
http://www.fairviewhorsecenter.com

Are We Having Fun Yet?

Oakleigh

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:01 PM

Master Tally,

With all due respect, you are getting off of the subject.

Yes. The chocolate postings ARE rude.

I may have posted about my son's leg, and asked for advice, but it was AFTER I had seen to it medically. You are taking my words out of context. (Oh, I notice you edited that little personal attack out of your posting now. Thank you.)

I am not interested in bickering with you. I posted my opinion of the discussion on the two Oldenburgs. Please don't make more out of it than there needs to be.

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

wanderlust

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:18 PM

Oakleigh... wasn't intended as a personal attack, but thanks to much cold medicine (and related dopiness and lack of typing skills), probably came across that way. Sorry (and btw, hope all worked out in that situation).

I don't think the chocolate postings are rude, think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this one. That is a great thing about this board... we CAN disagree, and except when ISR and GOV are involved, usually do so civilly. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I still think that it is IMPOSSIBLE for this board to have civil conversations about ISR and GOV when a certain poster is involved, and for that reason alone, I voted to ban discussions comparing them. Remove that one variable, and I think the discussions would actually be eductaional and interesting.

Erin

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:18 PM

To clarify, since I didn't really make this clear in my intial post... of course we would still allow people to talk about inspections or ask basic questions. But any discussion that turned to ISR vs. GOV would be closed, with posters directed look up threads in the archives.

We certainly wouldn't shut down a thread instantly if the letters ISR or GOV appeared. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif It would only be the threads debating the registries themselves that would be affected.

So what Liz described is exactly what we were envisioning. And of course, if it ever appeared that the situation had calmed down and could be rationally discussed, the ban would be lifted. Maybe "moratorium" would be a better tern to use, rather than "ban"... it certainly wouldn't have to be permanent.

Spotty Horses

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:26 PM

Perhaps there should be a special forum for discussing that and only that, then the rest of us don't have to see/hear it.

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:26 PM

As a breeder and trainer and stallion owner who has horses with various registries I have been very dismayed by the personal attacks that appear frequently on this topic. They are not about the ISR/Old NA or the GOV. They are about personal battles and rude behaviour. I would like to see the topic allowed and anyone who posts a rude personal attack be permanently banned from the COTH BB. I don't know if that is technically or legally possible. It seems clear that it is not possible to teach some people manners. Their ugliness is costing both registries possible members and breeders and it is bad for business for all of us.

As for the commment about not allowing someone to come across the street from the hunter show and speak to the breeders' show....Pardon me ...I am a full time stallion owner and breeder of premium foals and Champion Hunters and Jumpers. I host breed inspections and present Premium Foals and my horses win in the Hunter Breeding and all of the Hunter and Jumper divisions.

The exclusionary rude attitude that was displayed in the comment about the hunter show across the street is exactly the kind of thing that should warrant permanent loss of the privilege of participation in this complimentary BB so graciously provided by COTH. Thank you Rob and all of the Moderators for not shutting down the entire Breeding Forum because of the presence of a few bad apples.

CathyKb

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:29 PM

quote:

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Master Tally:

BTW- those of you who think the "chocolate brigade" is rude in their efforts to keep the conversation civil... be careful how you state it, because I find it insulting (as I'm sure do the rest of the brigade members) to pick on people who are trying to avoid additional threats of lawsuits against COTH. I can assure you that you have lost at least one potential customer who would have paid you good $$$ and provided your animal with an excellent home.
------------------------------------------------
Master Tally

I am sure you are a very nice person, but why would you want to say something like this when some posters find the original subject being turned to chocolate rude. This is just a matter of opinion. My future foals will find wonderful homes whether you buy them or not. Now I can understand why everyone needs a flame suit. I have respect for other people's opinions.

wanderlust

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:42 PM

Kathykb- my point was that repeatedly calling other people's actions rude, when they are in fact just trying to help, is offputting. Has nothing to do with not respecting their opinions. But their manner of expressing said opinion is offputting enough that I wouldn't want to do business with them. That is all I meant.

Edited to not seem so cranky. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[This message was edited by Master Tally on Oct. 04, 2003 at 11:06 PM.]

Spotty Horses

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:42 PM

I agree with Erin and Liz.

And I want to reveal, I did not look at any oldenburgs this year when I bought a new horse for exactly the reasons obvious here.

Palomino Leopard WB

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:46 PM

I have to say it's not always the subject mater that is the problem. Certain people just seem to want to make a war of certain issues. Or they seem to be able to make a war out of the smallest of issues. I have to think that although they must realize by now that no one wants to hear it and they are damadging their reputation that they just do not care. So perhaps it comes down to having to moderate certain people rather that certain subjects. We can all be adults here, if we have things to share then it can be done in PT's if the subject mater might be considered inflamatory.

Oakleigh

Oct. 4, 2003, 07:53 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Spotty Horses:
And I want to reveal, I did not look at any oldenburgs this year when I bought a new horse for exactly the reasons obvious here.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Spotty Horses, that makes absolutely no sense. A good performance horse is a good performance horse. It makes no difference what registration paper the horse has. A good many of us breeders work with BOTH registries. I pay membership dues to both. I am not polarized. A registry is nothing more than a service organization. Holding "some peoples" opinions of a registry against a horse just makes no sense.

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

Bugs-n-Frodo

Oct. 4, 2003, 08:20 PM

Liz, Very well put post. You did make several points that I was thinking through out this discussion. Your solution, as well as the moderator's solutions are very reasonable IMHO.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Amy
Owned by:
Cute as a Bugsear (Bugs) JC OTTTB (Isella x Annie Somebody)
Pippen (Frodo) ATA Anglo Trakehner (Paramoure x Cute as a Bugsear)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Policy of Truth

Oct. 4, 2003, 08:30 PM

I voted to ban the issue due to the fact that it instigates more hate than any topic I've ever seen on this BB since I've been registered!

I don't own an Oldenburg, but I sure as hell know the issue between the two: front, back upside down, inside out! It's getting so rediculous, that my NON-HORSE friends enjoy it as AMUSEMENT!!! Even they understand what happened with the split!

I say save us from ourselves and make this topic off limits, so we don't go down like the warmblood.net did! I used to LOVE that forum, and then the Oldenburg people killed the whole thing!

Do any of you who perpetuate this topic ad nauseum, ever think about how your bickering affects anybody else? Does it occur to any of you that many people are turned off by your issues?

"The conduct of the Oldenburg registries in this country has a huge impact on our market place and on hundreds of thousand of dollars of breeding animals"....

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gifCartier, YOUR conduct as well as others is what impacts anyone who reads this forum! YOU are making a VERY negative impact on your own business as well as Oldenbugs as a whole with your bitterness.

Tirade over, anger still there... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

fullmoon fever

Oct. 4, 2003, 09:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Oakleigh:
The posters who get on and make stupid comments like "with all this fighting, I will never own an Oldenburg..." are just showing their ignorance.

Oakleigh

_~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~_
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, we are showing our absolute disgust with the way in which the Oldenburg breeders to which we have been exposed (via this public forum) act.

Because I have no wish to associate with people who talk/behave in such a manner does not make me ignorant. Although I am sure that most Oldenburg breeders are not the ranters seen here, I have no wish to investigate any further. I can also certainly recognize a good horse; brand or no brand; doesn't mean I want it in my program if it comes with registry baggage.

Founder of the Olde Farte Clique; Member of the Dented Thigh Clique http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
If it ain't tack shopping, it's a waste of time and money.

arnika

Oct. 4, 2003, 09:15 PM

I also voted to ban the subject. Discussions about Oldenburg bloodlines, inspection procedures, baby/mare/stallion pics, etc. would be great. The OLDNA vs. GOV topic is incapable of being discussed without several posters becoming extremely personal and rude. I am among the group that doesn't wish to see this forum have problems like the others. I come here for knowledge, amusement and occasionally comfort and have no desire to lose this.

Silly Mommy

Oct. 4, 2003, 09:39 PM

Innocent bystander observing beautiful mare:

"So Silly Mommy, why don't you get Roz approved with some WB registries, it could open up your choices for breeding and marketing her babies. She'd make a fabulous contribution to any WB registry."

Silly Mommy takes a deep breath........ and then smiles and doesn't respond. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Most people who go around fanning the flames of crises are themselves the problem.

http://groups.msn.com/WolfdenFarm/shoebox.msnw

alexandra

Oct. 4, 2003, 10:14 PM

Actually I have to agree to Erin and Liz's post. Any discussion refering to the comparison of the two registries should be closed and people not beeing able to behave themselves or picking on other people (as happend to me and my language skills in a very rude manner) should be "banned" for a few days. It is just like at school: "if you cannot behave yourself - leave the room until you cooled down and can take part at the lessons again". It certainly helps with kids - why not with adults ?
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by fullmoon fever:
.....No, we are showing our absolute disgust with the way in which the Oldenburg breeders to which we have been exposed (via this public forum) act.

Because I have no wish to associate with people who talk/behave in such a manner does not make me ignorant. Although I am sure that most Oldenburg breeders are not the ranters seen here, I have no wish to investigate any further. I can also certainly recognize a good horse; brand or no brand; doesn't mean I want it in my program if it comes with registry baggage.

_Founder of the Olde Farte Clique; Member of the Dented Thigh Clique_ http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
_If it ain't tack shopping, it's a waste of time and money._<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And in addition of this quoted part:
If you read the threads and the behaviour people are showing in them and you conclusion is that you would not want to do business with them. Hey - that's a good point. If everybody does not want to do business with such people the problem solves itself ! They get out of breeding because of the lack of customers.
If I as a buyer would need to be afraid that I would get into legal action - well I just would not buy there. The people not behaving themselves in this forum destroy their own future. Let alone buyers might avoid them. Their reputation within the registry they are breeding also goes to zero and we all know that much business is done because of recommendations. So if nobody recommends such nasty people: again their business will shrink more and more. Problem solves itself again.
And in addition if such people want to do business with others e.g. they would want to buy a mare -Who of those serious breeders would sell them a horse when they can be sure that that good horse will belong to a person that is known as a troublemaker a lot of people would be happy not to be involved with ? One might be put together with such people, so I would certainly not sell a horse to people that I know have a bad reputation. (geeez am I happy I breed Hannoverians, even though with Oldenburg influence in them).

Erin can't we report those topics to you we think that are educational about the split? You put them in a "sealed box" maybe like the cactuscate topics even though not comparable to them at all ? If somebody asks a question like why did these organisations split - direct them towards that and that's it.

Alexandra

I am not responsible for spelling misstacks - just my PC

http://alexandra-fischer.privat.t-online.de

Spotty Horses

Oct. 4, 2003, 10:53 PM

Oakleigh, competitors also like to be involved in their registries, compete for breed awards, etc., and why get involved in one (or 1 of 2 in this case) that has so much controversy surrounding it (them)?

Sorry, it is not for me, nor some of the people I know who did not renew their membership to one of them this year. So I agree with fullmoon fever I suppose in that case. And I can find plenty of good horses with other brands just the same, so I have just balked form oldenburgs, though there are some nice ones.

Fortunalty, some of the oldenburg sires are approved with other registries so you can find nice offspring branded AHA, for example, out of Oldenburg stock.

But since I don't want to get involved, I will say no more.

All the threats of lawsuits, etc creep me out frankly.

Astraled

Oct. 4, 2003, 11:21 PM

Ban people, not topics http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif. Sheesh, what I'd give for a usenet style kill-file some days. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

I do understand the position the mods are in, and if it is banned, I'm not crying.

__________________________
You Know the Legends...Now Learn the Truth.
Bubba Ho-tep (http://www.bubbahotep.com)

dahlia

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:33 AM

Astraled I second your PLONK!

And what we need here is an Egyptian Soul Sucker. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Weatherford

Oct. 5, 2003, 02:20 AM

For those who aren't aware, there has been some editing on this fight threads - the most inflammatory posts are either edited or deleted (by deleted, we mean moved to a Moderator's forum, so we always have a copy!)...

This means many of you have NOT seen the worst of it. Believe me, the Moderators have - and with the cost of Internet connection here in Ireland, I really would love to not have to worry about checking these forums.

Fascinating, however, in terms of what happened and the various perspectives. My mother was given a wonderful retired Oldenberg mare (imported, former GP horse). Made me think I might even consider finding one... but I am still partial to TB's, and (of course) Irish Sport Horses.... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I think banning the discussion of one registry vs the other is a good idea. Unfortunately.

It's OUT! Linda Allen's 101 Exercises for Jumping co-authored by MOI!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Oakleigh

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:20 AM

Erin,

I woke up this morning and realized while it would be nice to be able to have a civil conversation regarding the two O registries, it just isn't possible here. Because many of the parties are anonymous, it's just too easy to post nasties without accountability.

So, with that in mind, I also would like to change my vote to make X vs Y off limits. But, we do need to be able to discuss their inspections and technicalities of getting a horse approved or registered with either of them. Just no direct X vs Y, or "What is the difference between X vs Y"...

Best regards,
Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

Dr. Cartier

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:53 AM

Hereâ€™s a problem with this poll that canâ€™t be ignored. There are indeed some long time large breeders who wish to have the issue framed a certain way so that they can continue under the present system. Irrespective of the impact on many smaller American Oldenburg breeders, the current situation works for them financially. And, there is a large breeder who has expressed a point of view. If the numbers are correct this breeder alone has about 3000 customers who could all post.

We once almost bought from this breeder, but chose not to. But in the time when this breeders was waiting to see if she had foals to sell us, she â€œexplainedâ€ the Oldenburg registry situation to us. We now believe that her version of what happened is missing many relevant facts. She sees the issue in terms which benefit her. We now realize, based on court documents email correspondence and video etc. that there are larger issues which impact a wide variety of American Oldenburg breeders.

At that time back in the spring of 2000 we were in close contact (often daily) with this breeder and her breeder friend in Germany. We have had ample opportunity to witness what goes on. We are aware of a dynamic which goes something like this: weâ€™d get an email saying, â€œHelp Iâ€™m being attacked, please post in my defense or write something for me to post.â€ These people approach a Forum topic as a gangâ€¦ and they wish to control the flow of information. Heck, for a short time I was part of it. (we have saved all email correspondence from that time.) These people had a dispute with the owner of a rival registry. They ganged up and went after the rival registry. They wanted the registry closed and a poster banned. And their tactics worked. The registry they went after has shrunken (it had no classes at Devon this year)and I haven't seen a post from the registry owner in months.

The forum gang mentality is sickening. Look at what these people write. They can only discuss personalities, but they can NOT discuss facts or issues.

Bottom line, we own Oldenburg horses who are breeding animals. Our Oldenburg horses are either in or eligible for both registries. This issue impacts us and our long term business interests just the same as it impacts all Oldenburg breeders large and SMALL. I donâ€™t wish to surrender to an anointed few (or a forum moderator) my right to understand the issues which impact our American Oldenburg market place. Arguably some of the people who now wish to foreclose discussion here are the very people who helped create this atmosphere of animosity and ignorance to begin with.

There are thousands of Oldenburg breeding animals in our country who will be bred in the years to come. And, there is no information on either Oldenburg registry website about "the split" issue. When we contacted the GOV on this subject, rather than being told the truth, we were given false information.

I think that the characterization of a â€œWARâ€ comes from small but effective group who are anchored to an outdated point of view because they benefit. IF we call the discussion a â€œWARâ€ it must be stopped, after all, who wouldnâ€™t want to stop a war? If we call it a â€œdiscussionâ€ it can go forward.

There is need for discussion among Oldenburg breeders. There is a need for soem changes and there is room for improvement. We need to return to one Oldenburg Registry in this country even if it hits a few people in their pocket book short term. I the long-term ONE American Oldenburg registry would be best for the largest group of people.

We can all set aside our personal interests and this emotionalism and look to the future.

~~Ignorance creates a vacuum that must be filled~~

[This message was edited by Dr. Cartier on Oct. 05, 2003 at 08:17 AM.]

sketcher

Oct. 5, 2003, 05:05 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Cartier:
Liz, ...

You wrote above that â€œthe reason for discussing it isn't for education purposes, but to do nothing more then to cause trouble and anger.â€

It is patently absurd for you to claim to know why someone else posts. You are speculating and then asserting that your speculation is fact.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't think Liz is stretching when she guesses that some people are posting to cause trouble. You would have to be an idiot not to see it.

I also have to say that Liz is one of the people who 'helps' herself when she posts on this topic because she stays professional and objective, regardless of what her 'agenda' is.

If everyone could behave this way, we wouldn't be having this discussion and those of us who have a lot to learn could actually do that without having to wade though all this nonsense.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dr. Cartier:
We once almost bought from this breeder, but chose not to. But in the time when this breeders was waiting to see if she had foals to sell us, she â€œexplainedâ€ the Oldenburg registry situation to us. We now believe that her version of what happened is missing many relevant facts. She sees the issue in terms which benefit her. We now realize, based on court documents email correspondence and video etc. that there are larger issues which impact a wide variety of American Oldenburg breeders. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Give me a break. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

[This message was edited by sketcher on Oct. 05, 2003 at 08:19 AM.]

Fairview Horse Center

Oct. 5, 2003, 05:34 AM

Don't you just get the feeling that some people sit at home giggleing and pinching each other at how much fun it is to cause trouble? http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

Darlyn
http://www.fairviewhorsecenter.com

Are We Having Fun Yet?

pintofoal

Oct. 5, 2003, 05:43 AM

DR Cartier now "You are speculating and then asserting that your speculation is fact." and getting a bit personal too with some gross inaccuracies I might add. <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>They can only discuss personalities, but they can NOT discuss facts or issues. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Let's not be a hypocrite here. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Finally a lovely day here with no rain...have at it guys I'm out of here and going out to enjoy my Oldenburg horses, both the ISR/OLD NA and GOV kind http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Liz Hall silverwoodfarm.com (http://silverwoodfarm.com)
Pinto & Colored Warmbloods Stallions

Dr. Cartier

Oct. 5, 2003, 05:58 AM

Liz,
You have a vested interest in these issues. So do we. I am not saying that it is wrong to have a vested interest, but neither you nor I are disinterested by-standers. And many who read this may not know that you have a long history with us. You are not posting to us as an unbiased bystander. We do not post our personal opinion of you, yet you feel free to post your personal opinions of us and your speculation that we wish to discuss these issues because we are angry or whatever.

Your and your friends have a personal opinion of us, based on a disagreement we had a few years ago. that is fine, but it spills over into every discussion. Look through the archives for any post we have directed at you. The only things we have said publicly are "Congratulations Liz."

~~Ignorance creates a vacuum that must be filled~~

CuriousGeorge

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:16 AM

"I donâ€™t wish to surrender to an anointed few (or a forum moderator) my right to understand the issues which impact our American Oldenburg market place."

Dr. Cartier, there is nothing wrong with your wish to discuss the Oldenburg situation.

However, WHY does it have to be HERE?

You just don't seem to be able to comprehend that the Chronicle of the Horse has done a marvelously NICE thing by giving us all this free playground (without requiring that we send affadavits that we own certain breeds or even that we subscribe to their fine publication.) http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Your insistance on continually bringing up this subject is akin to going to a dinner party and discussing politics or religion to the point of offending all the other guests and angering your hostess. If you did this in my home, I would encourage you to leave and would not invite you back. Simply put, it's rude.

There is a time and a place for everything, and the COTH bulletin board IMO is no longer the place for discussing this topic.

Policy of Truth

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:19 AM

"We once almost bought from this breeder, but chose not to. But in the time when this breeders was waiting to see if she had foals to sell us, she â€œexplainedâ€ the Oldenburg registry situation to us. We now believe that her version of what happened is missing many relevant facts"

So deal with her and move on!

Anyone else other than me wonder how this particular discussion board can have so much of a so-called "impact" on a breeders business...unless that breeder is just pissing a lot of people off?

Also, if the topic is so important, why don't you (anyone who has an EXTREME need to post about this topic) lease some webspace and MODERATE IT YOURSELF!! Then, maybe you'll get a taste of the headache you've been causing OUR moderators!!!

WHERE ARE THE BOUNDARIES HERE????? Some of you need to GROW UP and recognize that you can't always get your way. THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN BEAT TO DEATH!! What about WE'RE TIRED OF IT do some of you NOT understand? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

Dr. Cartier

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:38 AM

We don't have a gang of our breeders to call upon, but even without thousands of buddies to post on our behalfâ€¦ and even going against the bias of the phraseology of the poll question itself â€¦ there is still a 50-50 split on this issue. For most of yesterday the issue was over 50% in favor of allowing discussion.

Clearly a significant number of people would like to be able to discuss this issue. As others have suggested, if people donâ€™t want to discuss it or donâ€™t like a given poster then don't read the thread.

Curious George (whoever you really are) for you and all your buddies, please note, we do not come to your Chocolate Brigade posts and disrupt the flow of your â€œvaluableâ€ contribution to Sporthorse Breeding. WE do not make comments like â€œyou all need to get a life, a job or whatever. Rather, we let you run on and on for pages.

I urge you to either make a substantive contribution to the issues or not post. A Sport Horse Breeding Discussion Forum should be to discuss issues relevant to breeding sport horses.

What ever the outcome of this "poll" the issues are important and worth discussing in a civil manner.

Weâ€™re off to a horse show. Have a wonderful day everyone.

~~Ignorance creates a vacuum that must be filled~~

Rhonda

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:47 AM

Pacific Solo nailed it. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif Go get your own Yahoo group (they are free) and "discuss" all you want.

The COTH moderators shouldn't have to be tied to their computers whenever this is brought up.

mirrabook

Oct. 5, 2003, 07:02 AM

Since the ongoing discussion of this topic appears important to some, possibly the COTH could adopt a 'sign in' thread as one other board has done on this very topic. Then only those who want to participate need register, though Rhonda's suggestion of a Yahoo group is a good one..

CuriousGeorge

Oct. 5, 2003, 07:15 AM

"I urge you to either make a substantive contribution to the issues or not post."

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif Please show me how my last post was not constructive. I was making a substantive contribution. My contribution is ban the topic because people like you and your dear wife are not capable of discussing it calmly and rationaly without passive-aggressive attacks on others. I am only stating facts; this is not a personal attack.

I side entirely with Master Tally that although we do not all have moderator privileges, many of us have been here since the creation of the forums. There is for many of us an inherent sense of responsibility when things go too far. We know from past experiences that when people call Rob and John threatening lawsuits, the forums are in jeopardy. I would hate for everyone who enjoys posting (and even just reading) the wealth of knowledge and experience shared here to lose that because of the actions of two people who just don't get it.

I like how the Cartiers have dodged my point concerning the gratitude we should all feel toward COTH. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

"What ever the outcome of this "poll" the issues are important and worth discussing in a civil manner."

While I agree that the issues are important, nowhere is it written that the COTH must continue to sponsor this discussion. I find it extremely ironic that first you threatened to sue COTH because of the "bad press" you were receiving, and now you feel indignant toward COTH for even considering banning a topic. Which way do you want it?!?!?

Erin

Oct. 5, 2003, 07:24 AM

OK, a couple of people have said they want to change their votes... there's no way for me to edit the poll results to reflect that, but I will edit my initial post to list the changed votes. That way I can keep track of them and come up with an accurate final tally.

So far, I believe FHC and Oakleigh have said they want to change "no" votes to "yes." Alexandra, I wasn't sure from your latest post if you were saying you wanted to change yours, but if so, let me know.

MdLib

Oct. 5, 2003, 07:33 AM

Hear, Hear CuriousGeorge. I have been dying to ask cartiers what's to be accomplished by threatening legal action against the very platform which allows them the freedom to express an opinion. Why bite the hand that feeds you? Why not realize that there are rules with which you may not agree, but that we all must abide by for this priviledge, and that it ain't gonna change? Life isn't fair, so suck it up. And if this is your biggest problem, I'd say life has been more than fair to you.

And, frankly, it p**ses me off that it has to come to banning topics.

Erin

Oct. 5, 2003, 07:38 AM

And Dr. Cartier... did you and your wife not say initially that the only people who should be voting in the poll are those who are affected? Well then, I don't think you can claim it's unfair because a breeder who is affected has expressed an opinion.

Of course the poll isn't foolproof. If someone REALLY wanted to skew the results, they could just sign up for username after username and vote away.

There is a current tally of registered members on the front page of the forum. It currently stands at 9624. If it jumps to 12,624 by Monday and if there are 3115 votes in the poll, maybe then you will have a valid complaint.

As I said before, the point of the poll was to discern if there was overwhelming interest in allowing these discussions to continue here on COTH. If there were, that might make it worth the moderators' time and headaches trying to moderate them.

At the moment -- both by the votes and the posts made on the thread -- it appears to be a pretty even split.

We'll let the poll continue through Monday to let the at-work crowd have their say.

Oh, and alexandra, yes, if anyone wants to "report" threads on the Oldenburg issue that they feel are particularly relevant, I'll move them to the Reference forum.

horsesrus

Oct. 5, 2003, 08:21 AM

i agree with y@afarms-
three strikes and your out should be the policy to get rid of those who cant keep their personal agendas and egoes out of the rest of our faces. Just eliminate those who cant play by the rules. I mean get a life people. Cant you find something better to do with your time??? Give your puter a rest.

Mannuscript Farm

Oct. 5, 2003, 08:52 AM

I would have no problem with allowing the discussion of this particular topic if there were a) something new to be discussed; b) the participants could discuss it productively, civilly, and courtesously without the personal attacks that seem prevelant; and c) there was something to be gained by the discussions. Unfortunately, it's always the same participants, discussion, attacks and lack of any pertinent, new information. It is probably THE primary reason that the ISR/Oldenburg N.A. and the GOV both agreed to a "cooling off" period before resuming discussions in the future.

What is tragic about this whole thing is that it is a topic that breeders are very passionate about. However, it seems to color some of the individuals involved, opinions about others in a truly unfortunate and negative fashion. And, it does absolutely NOTHING beneficial with regards to outside opinions on the breed itself. It simply polarizes sides in a most unpleasant and negative fashion and does nothing for the betterment of public opinion of either faction.

So, I'm with everyone else that would like to see a ban on the topic, but with perhaps the caveat that it be limited for one year. By that point in time, perhaps there will be some new and productive information to discuss on the topic.

Kathy St.Martin
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallion, Mannhattan
http://mannuscriptfarm.com

Kathy Mann
Mannuscript Farm
Home of the Oldenburg stallion, Mannhattan
http://www.mannuscriptfarm.com

alexandra

Oct. 5, 2003, 08:59 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Erin:
OK, a couple of people have said they want to change their votes... there's no way for me to edit the poll results to reflect that, but I will edit my initial post to list the changed votes. That way I can keep track of them and come up with an accurate final tally.

So far, I believe FHC and Oakleigh have said they want to change "no" votes to "yes." Alexandra, I wasn't sure from your latest post if you were saying you wanted to change yours, but if so, let me know.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Erin: well at first I thought the closing would be for all Oldenburg related topics, so I was more on the no ban for topics side. But now I have come to another conclusion especially after the latest posts here. To avoid any negative discussion on this forum it seems to be importatn to close all the topics related to why the two registries are separated and comparisons like Registry A does it better because... Topics as rgistry a does action x clockwise and registry B does it vice versa Should not be banned as long as nobody states that the clockwise solution is the only one acceptable. Still closing topics need lots of sure instinct or tact of the moderators and is therefore not easy: where is the line to be drawn ? It is much easier to either delete posts of people being rude and nasty or ban them for a few days. Even though they are threatening lawsuits (spelling on this one ???).
So I would vote for a yes close all topics related to comparisons on those registries, a yes to ban people who are starting trouble and a no to forbidding to mention the word Oldenburg.

Alexandra

I am not responsible for spelling misstacks - just my PC

http://alexandra-fischer.privat.t-online.de

Erin

Oct. 5, 2003, 09:06 AM

Regarding banning...

In the nearly 5 years this forum has been online, there have only been 7 "members in good standing" who have been banned. Two of those people apologized for their actions and were reinstated; one then went off the deep end again and was re-banned. That's a total of 6 people, out of nearly 10,000 members over 5 years.

By "members in good standing," I mean people who have been around and who have been contributing to threads in a constructive way. This doesn't include the "trolls" who register and immediately start posting to piss people off... like a poster called Massive Impressive, who posted a topic in this forum last week titled (to borrow Robby Johnson's term) "Go [fuh] a horse." People like that have never been a real and contributing member of this community. Still, I would venture a guess that only a dozen or so people like that have been banned.

You have to do something pretty damn bad to get banned from this forum. Unless we feel that someone is flagrantly and repeatedly violating the rules, we will generally just warn them and edit their posts.

Unfortunately, certain parties involved in the Oldenburg issues have claimed that editing posts means moderators are "controlling information," and have threatened lawsuits over it and called COTH to complain.

That's yet another reason why our typical methods for dealing with controversial topics don't seem to be workable with regard to the Oldenburg issue.

Basically, the reason I proposed the moratorium is because nothing else has worked. And while I agree that removing one or two posters from the equation would probably solve the problem, I'm not sure that's something that COTH can do without creating even MORE headaches.

HeyYouNags

Oct. 5, 2003, 09:32 AM

As a card-carrying member of the chocolate and baby eating, haiku-writing brigade, I must post in our defense. This board has a long standing tradition of trying to diffuse tense situations by turning to humor. Peeps, quiche, singing Kumbaya, and now chocolate eating are all part of the attempt to deflect hostility.

It's a way of pointing out that posters are crossing the line into rudeness, without pointing to individuals.

Hear, hear, to the posters who said the people who want to keep yammering at the moderators and other members about this topic should start their own blog, board, website, whatever.

Various message boards have their own tones and styles. If you don't like the style of this one, then tant pis. Go find another playgroup.

I'm far less appalled at discussions of chocolate (mmm, chocolate....) than at posters recounting their personal beefs with others on the board, and while not naming names, providing enough detail that even an outsider can figure out who they're dissing.

For the record, I presented two mares last year to a registry that shall not be named http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I asked a civil question about the nature of the dissent on this board beforehand, and got remarkably evenhanded answers. The responses were informative and straightforward.

Of course, that was more than a year ago, and I don't recall any of the current group of snarky breeders posting on the topic... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Coreene

Oct. 5, 2003, 10:28 AM

This quote by Dr. Cartier - "Rather, we let you run on and on for pages" - um ... this use of "we" troubles me. It's not up to you whether it runs on and on.

Portia

Oct. 5, 2003, 11:32 AM

To follow the suggestions from others already, here's an idea --

There is clearly a core of people who want to discuss this topic in great detail and object to the moderation of these forums, to the extent of threatening lawsuits against the moderators and the COTH. They believe that the moderators are biased, either because most of us don't breed or own Oldenburg horses or because one of us (me) does own an Oldenburg mare (though she is a performance mare and has never been bred.) Clearly, those personal desires and beliefs by this group of members create a big problem for the moderators individually and for the COTH.

So, my suggestion is that we ban the discussion of this topic from these forums, and if it is important enough to the people who have the strong desire to continue the discussion, they may start their own forum to do so.

For those of you who feel that the issue is one which should be discussed "freely" in a public forum, and without what you consider to be improper interference from the moderators, or not enough interference from the moderators, why don't you get together and start a forum of your own expressly dedicated to such discussion?

It's not difficult to do. There are several hosting sites that you can start discussion forums on, including Infopop and ezboard.

As an example, several months ago several people who used to post here, and many of whom still do regularly, started their own forum on the ezboard, and from what I can tell it's been quite successful. They made their own rules to fit their needs and desires. It gives them a place to freely discuss all the off topic things that aren't allowed here, and they don't have any interference from moderators. One of their rules is that you have to be over 18 to post there, which allows them to use adult language and talk about topics that we would not be able to allow here.

Most of the folks who started their own board, and many others, have access to both forums, and many choose to post on both boards. It's been a good solution for everyone, and one that could work in this case as well.

[This message was edited by Portia on Oct. 05, 2003 at 02:48 PM.]

Lisamarie8

Oct. 5, 2003, 11:58 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Dr. Cartier:
We don't have a gang of our breeders to call upon, but even without thousands of buddies to post on our behalfâ€¦ <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I can't imagine why that is...y'all being such a party and all... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Erin, I know you're totally level headed and a fabu chick in general, and even though this has NOTHING to do with me, I had to post...as a matter of fact maybe that's why i should post.

The idea of banning a horse related topic on this board is a little stinky i think.

For the most parts we are all grown-ups http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif If you don't want to read it don't. If you don't want to fuel the flames, don't. If you wanna post and call the whole thing ridiculous, do; but not having that option is a little heavy handed i think.

Like I said, I don't give 2 snots about ISR...GOV...ESPN...FBI or whatever they're fighting about, (TB's are the way to go http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif )but i have read all the posts and while they're petty and childish (some of them anyway) they are relatively harmless. Threats of lawsuits or not (I can't even BELIEVE that, me thinks someone needs a hobby) I find it hard to believe that you think banning a SUBJECT is a justifiable action.

Just my worthless $.02

--- "We're putting you on what we call sudden death academic probation."

Duffy

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:00 PM

Just one of the problems is, lisamarie, that the moderators are HAVING to view these threads, even if they don't want to, because of some of these posters. If they could trust (HAHA) these posters to not get out of hand while discussing this issue, they wouldn't have a problem with it either.

And while these posters are petty and childish, they are a problem for the entire BB because of their actions, not just ON the BB itself.

"B***h in training"

Portia

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:01 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by pintofoal:
Let me ask those of you who have made such a statement as the one mentioned above and following; "I wouldn't want an Oldenburg after reading this forum" Why? is it because of:

A) the behavior of "Oldenburg" people on forums and you'd be scared to meet them in a dark alley;
B) because you are confused about Oldenburgs and it makes your head spin;
C) because of the "split" of the registries, you just can't choose;
D) because you raise Dutch, Hans, TB's or whatevers and everything else is junk.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am one of the people who have said something to this effect. Not that I wouldn't buy or breed an Oldenburg horse -- I do have an Old N.A. papered and GOV main mare book approved mare -- but that if I ever breed her, I will find an alternative registry for the foal.

The reason is exclusively that raised in choice A. I've been reading these threads, first on the warmbloods.net forums, and on the dressage forums, then here, for years now, and the attitudes of many who are involved in breeding Oldenburgs, on both sides, is extremely disturbing to me. They are people with whom I do not want to do business and with whom I do not wish to be associated.

That said, I recognize that I am tarring two entire breed organizations with the same brush based on the actions of some very vocal people who may or may not be closely associated with one or the other of those organizations. There are people involved in these topics who have consistently been civil and tried to broker peace, decrying the effect of such public fighting. I feel sorry for them, because the public actions, statements, and attitudes of others have driven people away from Oldenburg breeders (regardless of registry affiliation) as a whole.

Lisamarie8

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:08 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Duffy:
Just one of the problems is, lisamarie, that the moderators are HAVING to view these threads, even if they don't want to, because of some of these posters. If they could trust (HAHA) these posters to not get out of hand while discussing this issue, they wouldn't have a problem with it either.

And while these posters are petty and childish, they are a problem for the entire BB because of their actions, not just ON the BB itself.

"_B***h in training_"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess I know Duffy, Sad isn't it? I just REALLY think it sucks that a few people who need a ridilin and a shot of bourbon could cause such a heavy handed policy.

Whoâ€™s got the purse? Maybe if i get the DQ's frying pan, put it in Aunt Esther's Purse, and start wielding that unmercifully we could get things in line http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

--- "We're putting you on what we call sudden death academic probation."

Duffy

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:11 PM

I can think of some other alternative treatments as well, lisamarie. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

"B***h in training"

Palisades

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:15 PM

I have nothing to do with Oldenburgs, and read this forum rarely at best. However, I voted to ban these discussions simply because I feel so bad for our VOLUNTEER moderators who are forced to police the same crap over and over. Clearly some people are not capable of having discussions on this issue that do not turn into b*tchfests. I'm not accusing people or taking sides, because I don't even really know what the sides are or who is on them. However, when it's clear that every time a topic comes up, some people are going to resort to personal attacks and flaming, it's not fair to ask the moderators to police the same fight again and again.

That's just my vote, and I realize I have nothing to do with the issue. But I am a member of the boards, and stressing out the moderators and wasting bandwidth acting like spoiled children is hurting everyone who posts here.

Note: I realize the majority of you participating in Oldenburg discussion are thoughtful, intelligent, mature people, and nothing I said above applied to you. It's a shame when some people ruin it for everyone.

Erin

Oct. 5, 2003, 12:17 PM

LM8, I totally agree with you... and a couple of weeks ago, I would have been arguing against this.

Ooh, the frying pan IN the purse! Now that is a force to be reckoned with! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

stillpointfarm

Oct. 5, 2003, 01:10 PM

While I haven't commented much on the "Highly Debated GOV vs. ISR Controversy", I have followed the discussions. While it seems to be an enormous issue here on COTH, I really do not hear or see this "Confusion" in the real world of selling warmbloods, perhaps there is a lack of pedigree knowledge, but to me that's to be expected from a buyer, afterall they are NOT breeders, just riders who are looking for a "GOOD" horse. Personally, I find that breeding a good horse has nothing to do with registry affiliation, but the common ground here is that we are breeders with the same goal to breed excellent sport horses. There are good breeders and good horses on both sides of this controversy, and hopefully one day they will both resolve their differences and reunite.
BUT>>>>>>>These kinds of endless discussions go nowhere to the reunifcation. Do we really believe that a resolution will evolve here on the pages COTH ?? I think that's ridiculous, futhermore this banter does nothing for reunification, it creates more animosity and division. Some posters seem to want that and thrive on that, have personal vendettas and need a forum to pontificate their rhetoric.
Personally everytime I hear that there is "Confusion " in our market I find this condescending and insulting to us knowledgeable breeders. I am not "Confused" and anyone who has been breeding for any length of time is NOT confused. I find it both strange and hilarious that the loudest spokesperson for this theory of "Confusion" in the marketplace is someone who has by her own words had her first foal EVER this spring, born at the repro center not on her farm, has no practical, or first hand knowledge, has never bred her own mare, had this done for her at a repro center or stallion facility....purchased her first horse just 2 years ago with full knowledge of the mares history and perhaps compelled by the very issue that remains her argument and vendetta on this forum. Maybe being new at this they are the ones "Confused"........
I vote "YES"...... the "COTH Welcome Rug" should be pulled out from underneath them !!
AND as far as Conspiracy Theory of the forum thugs go......Baloney or should I say Chocolate Baloney !!

[This message was edited by stillpointfarm on Oct. 06, 2003 at 08:20 AM.]

ltw

Oct. 5, 2003, 01:13 PM

I have been quiet on this discussion board on the ISR/GOV subject for fear of sparking another personal attack and more threats.

However, today I am registering my vote and speaking out so that some of you that don't have the history can realize that this is more about two people's furthering their agenda then anything to do with the ISR/GOV issues. I think the registries have reached a settlement that everyone can live with a couple of years ago.

I have joined the current 53% and voted to ban the discussions as well. In the past year I have not read one new informative message about the ISR/GOV issue posted here that makes it worth holding these discussions.

However, I don't think banning this subject will fix the problem. I believe the only way you will fix the problem is if you ban the posters that continually cause the controversy. I suggest a poll to the membership to decide whether the troublemakers should be banned.

To give some of you a little history...

To date, these individuals who are new to Horse breeding and new to Oldenburg breeding have made it their personal mission to ruin the Oldenburg name in hopes of gaining enough consensus to file a lawsuit.

The more you support them, you support the cause they wish to further to win $$$$ against GOV to go in their personal pockets.

This year their beef is with GOV, last year it was with ISR. Who knows what or who the next target will be.

As soon as you shut this subject down these individuals will find a new platform and start a smear campaign against either a new cause, a new registry, COTH, a different farm or an individual.

I have watched the pattern for 3 years. I have watched two other bulletin boards be shut down because of this. I have watched numerous threats of lawsuits from these same individuals.

I was one of the targets of a smear campaign because I defended my opinion and dared to disagree. I have two threatening letters from these individuals in my file cabinet mailed to my home threatening me with a lawsuit or a settlement out of court. The threats got much nastier than that, and very personal.

Just by writing this post I am sure the threats and nasty campaign will start against me again. But I think it is important for the members of this bulletin board to know that personal threats are not acceptable just because you disagree with an individual on a public bulletin board.

I am an avid Hanoverian and Oldenburg breeder, rider and competitor. I have been for many years. I love my horses and have visited the German breeding areas many times.

However, these people have made being involved with Oldenburg horses, the organization and Oldenburg people no longer a joyful or fun experience. My stomach turns when I read the continual day after month after year harping and personal attacks on Oldenburg officials and breeders.

These individuals have never visited the Oldenburg area, they don't know the German horses, breeders, history or officials. Yet, there has been a systematic effort to destroy the Oldenburg name in the USA.

I own 4 Hanoverian mares and one Oldenburg mare. Yesterday, I took my one lovely German Oldenburg mare and had her inspected Hanoverian. She was accepted into the Hanoverian book with a very high score because she was of excellent quality. She had one of the highest scores of the day.

I never intended to inspect her Hanoverian when I bought her. I visited the Oldenburg area and got to know their history, horses, registry and was quite impressed by what I saw. I was dipping my little toe into the GOV world for the first time as I had already established a group of high quality States Premium and Elite Hanoverian mares.

I inspected this GOV mare with the Hanoverians not because I have any problems with the split of the ISR/GOV, not because I have any beef with Oldenburg. I have been a great supporter of GOV and have put up personal money for sponsorship of many GOV awards over the last 3 years, I respect the organization.

I had my mare inspected and approved Hanoverian because I am so sick and tired of the fact that two people have made it their full time job to ruin GOV and it's breeders.

When I read that no one wants to breed, own or buy an Oldenburg horse anymore it makes me very sad because of these arguments on this board and other boards over the last 3 years. The warmblood marketplace is VERY TIRED of this!

I have to take action to protect my breeding program so that I can continue to sell my foals and breed my mares. This makes me very sad, but this is the way it will have to be for now.

Laura Whitford
www.studbook.com/shadowfox (http://www.studbook.com/shadowfox)

*SERAPH*

Oct. 5, 2003, 01:17 PM

Though I do not own an Oldenburg and have no desire to, I feel that there is validity to allowing these discussions to continue as it is an ongoing situation and both markets as well as breeders (of both registries) seem to have been affected.

I do believe there should be no personal attacks allowed by either an advocate of the GOV or an advocate of the ISR/NA. That defeats the purpose of discussion. I believe that those who do not want to read about the topic anymore should simply refrain from reading and posting on the thread.

Though the posting has gotten heated and even slightly nasty at times, the infamous thread on eventing was the worst I have yet to see.

Aside from those thoughts, I do believe those who are truly interested in this situation should open their own forum on it if they seriously want to get something accomplished. However, I cannot advocate not allowing it at all even if it does get tiresome at times. As long as it remains civil, I see no reason the two parties cannot argue their beliefs.

stillpointfarm

Oct. 5, 2003, 01:25 PM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by ltw:
I have to take action to protect my breeding program so that I can continue to sell my foals and breed my mares. This makes me very sad, but this is the way it will have to be for now.

Laura...you give them far more credit than they deserve !!!!!!
Carolyn

Sporthorse South

Oct. 5, 2003, 01:26 PM

I've been in and out looking at horses with clients (including some NON-OLDENBURGS), so I haven't registered a vote 'till now, but I will post a few thoughts here (although I'm sure I will be damned if I do vote for the moratorium, and damned if I vote against it). http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

So (taking a deep breath here before plunging in) - I'm all for a moratorium. Like others, I am really tired of seeing this topic revisited every week or so, and am especially weary of the constant harangues against GOV, most of which come from the keyboard of ONE particular couple who don't agree with GOV policies and have therefore apparently become self-appointed "caped crusaders" determined to bring GOV to its knees here in North America.

Here's a news flash: The Oldenburg Verband will reunite with ISR only WHEN and IF it decides it is in its best interests to do so. Constant rehashing on this forum and others about things that may or may not have happened in the past, as well as continually making inflammatory comments about the Verband and its policies, employees, officials, supporters, etc., is not doing anything to encourage the Verband to want to become affiliated with folks on "the other side."

So, yes, I think we could ALL benefit from some "down time". Get outside and enjoy the beautiful fall weather, play with your horses, spend time with your family, friends, neighbors, go shopping, go to a movie, or a golf tournament, or a football game - whatever makes you happy. You might find that - surprise - there's a lot more to life than the Oldenburg issue. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Tom King

Oct. 5, 2003, 02:46 PM

Another solution would be to add another Discussion Forum here for this topic. The total number of topics would be self-limiting and I don't think that the problem of having the same thing said over and over would be as prolific. Points of view would be available for those interested in reading or continuing the discussion and the Breeding Forum would not have such a large percentage of every page taken up by it. I think overall it would take less space for COTH.

And I extend a personal thank-you to the folks that make this BB available.

Spectrum

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:05 PM

Here's a thought... If such a forum were to become reality, COTH could have a permanent disclaimer posting at the top saying it is an open forum where moderation is only allowed for off-topic posts.

That way COTH isn't legally liable for nasty postings, off-topic posts can be deleted, and everyone is responsible for his/her own actions.... Kind of like we're all adults or something! Neat idea, huh?

Policy of Truth

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:08 PM

"Another solution would be to add another Discussion Forum here for this topic. The total number of topics would be self-limiting ..."

Farmdad, I think IDEALY this is what would happen, but unfortunately, it doesn't eliminate the threats of lawsuits et al, that the moderators are having to deal with http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

SoEasy

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:10 PM

Check the disclaimer at the bottom of every single page ...

Copyright Â© The Chronicle of the Horse 2003

The opinions expressed are solely those of the authors and not those of the Chronicle of the Horse;
The Chronicle of the Horse takes no responsibility for such statements.

WARNING: What follows is my personal opinion, and does not necessarily reflect that of COTH or it's employees ...

What more is necessary before unhappy people with attorneys on speed dial don't call the publisher?

CuriousGeorge

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:15 PM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif CuriousGeorge votes that if you call anyone at COTH and even mention the words "attorney" or "lawsuit", you get banned. Automatically. Like a dog with an invisible fence collar who gets too close to the line. Zap.

Sonesta

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:19 PM

You know, the thing I really wish for is that the two registries, ISR/ONA and GOV, realize that their few rabid "supporters" who cause all the strife are KILLING the name of the Oldenburg horse in the US. I fervently wish these registries would KICK THEM OUT of the very registries they are so viciously supporting by attacking the other. If the registries would DISOWN these fools, maybe things would simmer down some and rational heads could prevail.

Sonesta Farms (http://www.sonestafarms.com) - breeding Hanoverian, Knabstrupper and Arabian sport horses. 
"Find something you love & call it work."

Castlegate

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:20 PM

I voted NO as I don't think that we should ban any one topic no matter how emotional it may be for some.....not all of the discussions regarding this topic have been nasty, some have been very educational which is one of the best things about this forum....if we ban this subject, next year we will have to ban something else that becomes an emotional issue...

However we SHOULD ban those posters that opt to voice their nasty personal attacks.....

I feel truly sorry for the moderators however if we just keep banning topics because some people can't play well with others those "bad" posters will continue to get their way....

in other words a few bad apples should spoil the value of decent and respectable discussions.

JMHO

Coreene

Oct. 5, 2003, 03:51 PM

LM8, I loff you!

wanderlust

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:07 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by CuriousGeorge:
http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif CuriousGeorge votes that if you call anyone at COTH and even mention the words "attorney" or "lawsuit", you get banned. Automatically. Like a dog with an invisible fence collar who gets too close to the line. Zap.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I second that motion... although I'm not sure whether I like the banning or the shock collar idea better. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

ltw

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:10 PM

I 3rd the motion about the shock collar and the ZAP!

carosello

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:14 PM

Well I have only made it to page three and have to agree that Liz made some good points. I havent voted yet...I will think on it some more (and read on when I have more time).

What is amazing to me is the fight always seems to be about what happened years ago. What we should worry about is now.

dahlia

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:14 PM

I 4th that motion.
That is the best idea I have ever heard of on this board.

__________________________________________________ ________
"The point of horse shows is to eat $9 hamburgers while wearing wool in summer." -me

Oakleigh

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:19 PM

This whole situation is very sad. There is NOTHING wrong with Oldenburg horses. They are lovely sporthorses. What's wrong is a few very vocal people. Most of them are not even posters on this board.

There is an amazing amount of passion associated with this discussion. I just don't think it merits this much passion. They are just service organizations. They provide services. I sure wish people would get this passionate over health care or elections or homeless people...

The discussion started off nasty, then got civil, then turned nasty again with personal attacks after the chocolate brigade raised ire. There were even some times in there when we mostly all agreed on something... I enjoyed reading parts of it. Even though some of it was a rehash, it was educational.

I'm saddened that we can't have a civil discussion on this board. Instead we have to discuss Show Sheen in your hair and thong underwear...

Erin, isn't there some way to validate email addresses? That would keep alters off, and would help keep discussion on subject. My local newspaper has a forum which will only accept one screen name per ISP. Don't know how they do it.

It's just a thought...

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

Oakstable

Oct. 5, 2003, 04:20 PM

It's against the law to yell "fire" in a crowded theater because people will panic and trample others to get to the exit. It has been determined that freedom of speech does not apply when someone does something not based on fact but out of whim or malice. I submit that the periodic registry vs. registry debate be put on moratorium indefinitely. If something really new evolves, then open it up.

I read Laura's post. I recall from the old warmbloods.net threads when she decided to support the OV. I know her to be a prominent Hanoverian breeder and interviewed her for an article in the defunct Warmblood magazine. I think this is quite a statement about how poisonous this Oldenburg fiasco has become that someone like Laura would decide to take her OV mare to the AHS. The bloodlines overlap so much that it's not a risk in anyway, not something that isn't done every day in Germany. But it's a statement about how a handful of people have clouded the breeding climate in the USA.

Let the people who want to scream at each other join their own Yahoo list. And please keep these COTH forums that the public at large visits an enjoyable and educational place to visit.

Erin

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:05 PM

Actually, Oakleigh, we already do validate email addresses.

Honestly though, I don't think alters are all that big of a contributing factor.

Silly Mommy

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:28 PM

IF I had an alter, it wouldn't waste it's time on those threads. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif It would do something productive, like trash snotty rich kids who need to learn how to ride instead of perch. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Nope, no way am I going to for one more second entertain the thought of approval by either of those registries for my dear sweet Roz. I have a hard enough time dealing with my local PHA show circuit dribble - I don't "do" politics... I'd rather breed nice babies without the paperwork. I don't sell them til they're in the showring anyway, so by that time, registries don't matter if they're nice, competitive, athletic individuals.

Most people who go around fanning the flames of crises are themselves the problem.

http://groups.msn.com/WolfdenFarm/shoebox.msnw

Everythingbutwings

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:44 PM

The COTH forums (nor the warmbloods.net or other bb's that no longer make themselves available for this particular group to bring up this long lambasted topic) are NOT a bully pulpit!

I find it highly hypocritical that the very faction who wishes to use the sport horse breeding forum for a free space to complain are the same who scream foul that the very members whom they wish to convince are diverting the discussion to channels of neutral conversation.

Since the topic is falling on deaf ears, they need to do better market research and start a forum (very easily done by the way, just not as convienient as having one already in place and available with the cachet of the COTH attached to the name) of their own and work towards gaining a following of their own. Perhaps, a following that hasn't already heard this particular grudge fest ad nauseum for several years.

I happen to know of a very nice chocolate brown Oldenburg gelding who would do well in the hunt field. Of course, hunters don't particularly care greatly as long as the horse performs. That sort of eliminates the majority of the fussing, doesn't it? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Friendship is Love without his wings
-Lord Byron

Oakleigh

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:49 PM

Ahhh, sorry Erin. I didn't know that. So, how do alters get on then? There are some really obnoxious alters that post here...

Well, I was just trying to come up with some sort of positive idea here...

Oakleigh

~~~~>>>>****~~*~~****<<<<~~~~
Breeder of Holsteiner and Oldenburg prospects.
Oakleigh Sporthorses (http://hometown.aol.com/psulli1002/page1.html)

sixpoundfarm

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:51 PM

I voted yes, because this is a tired old rag and it is time to move on. It creates nastiness, hatred, and negativity that I dont feel outweighs the good that may come from discussing it over and over. It is sad to have to ban issues at all, but for the good of this wonderful FREE service, I think it is a good plan.

For the indiviuals so passionate about it, please do go start a yahoo group, or other discussion area for it, and just offer people to visit should there be interest from newbies. There is plenty of information available online for people to research. For the rest, pick your group based upon your needs and who meets them best.

I think there are many individuals out there busting their butts to run/create/maintain awesome breeding programs, regardless of the brand that is placed on the horses papers, body etc. If producing a top notch sporthorse is the goal, than the registry that stamps its papers should be the least of anyone's worries. I can guarantee that most of the serious riders (BUYERS)I know are buying the individual, not its papers or registry.

I for one would like to see different types of contributions of discussion. If you want to educate new breeders, discuss the foundations of breeding, THE HORSES we want to create. Conformation, movement, useage of body, type, etc. Those are the things that people need to learn from, not who wronged whom.
And to the chocolate peeps, carry on as necessary.

pintofoal

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:52 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> happen to know of a very nice chocolate brown Oldenburg gelding...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did you say chocolate?!?! ummm...yummy but, thats a no, no, http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I truely apologize I couldn't help myself http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/uhoh.gif

Liz Hall silverwoodfarm.com (http://silverwoodfarm.com)
Pinto & Colored Warmbloods Stallions

Erin

Oct. 5, 2003, 06:54 PM

Well, validating the email address just means that we check to be sure it's a working address (a confirmation email is sent to it, with a link that must be clicked to activate the account) and we don't allow the same email address to be used for multiple usernames.

But there are plenty of free email accounts out there (Yahoo, Hotmail, etc.), AOL accounts give you multiple screen names, and plenty of people have more than one email address.

The email validation just makes the process of setting up an alter a little more tedious, to hopefully deter people from having them. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Silly Mommy

Oct. 5, 2003, 07:27 PM

Also remember that not all alters are trolls. Some people post under their real names, and or, are well known even if they use a screen name - may need to express something without having their identity exposed (not that I ever have http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif).

Kind of like, since your regular username isn't anonymous, and to protect yourself in a post that may (or may not- ya just don't want to be recognized for that particular oppinion) be inflammatory you need that anonymity, you use an alter.

Most people who go around fanning the flames of crises are themselves the problem.

http://groups.msn.com/WolfdenFarm/shoebox.msnw

Dr. Cartier

Oct. 5, 2003, 08:24 PM

[Edited until such time as Erin has a chance to review and edit/whatever.

I would also like to point out that there are 2 very grumpy TB geldings who have added a "yes" vote to this poll based solely on the fact that their breakfast has been delayed while I attend to this issue...]

[This message was edited by Chestnut Mare on Oct. 06, 2003 at 07:39 AM.]

Palomino Leopard WB

Oct. 6, 2003, 12:40 AM

CARTIERenough already! You are absolutely over the top with your claims and finger pointing. Never has anyone mentioned either of your names in this post, and still you continue to try to smear other breeders reputation. If your feeling somehow guilty for this discussion to have to go to a poll, then perhaps you should apologize and let it go. If you cannot do that then perhaps you should find another forum more suited to arguing this casue.

Zlotych

Oct. 6, 2003, 04:33 AM

Can we please take the dirty laundry elsewhere?

Everyone has some baggage somewhere, and not everyone cares to know the "Jerry Springer" type details of peoples private interactions. It is getting way too personal and alltogether too frequent.
As to the claims of if you dont like it dont read it, much like the chocolate posts many are distressed about, these witch trials pop up in threads that people open thinking might have some informative value, only to find they do not. So Please, I beseech you. Take it somewhere else.

Dr. Cartier

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:00 AM

The content of my post above was entirely deleted.

Liz Hall and Laura Whitford made some very specific claims aboutmy wife and I which are false and defamatory. These were broadcast on a public forum and without any question people have formed opinions about me based on their statements. I have a right to respondâ€¦ I will forward (fax, email, snail-mail) to ANYONE data/ facts to support everything I said. I believe it wrong to allow others to attack us, when they have a clear personal and business agenda. Not allowing me to respond in simply wrong. COTH Is a better magazine then to allow this.

~~Ignorance creates a vacuum that must be filled~~

[This message was edited by Dr. Cartier on Oct. 06, 2003 at 08:11 AM.]

[This message was edited by Dr. Cartier on Oct. 06, 2003 at 08:11 AM.]

Everythingbutwings

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:08 AM

Dr Cartier, you seem to be the only one naming names here. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Friendship is Love without his wings
-Lord Byron

Castlegate

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:18 AM

If we take someone to Tribal Council on Thursday evening I would bet we could leave all topics open for discussion....

And the first person voted of the COTH is.....

The tribe has spoken......

[This message was edited by Castlegate on Oct. 06, 2003 at 09:23 AM.]

talloaks

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:19 AM

Everythingbutwings, it appears that you are singling out one party about naming names, but don't you think publicly insinuating people as ltw posted is the same thing---and you are not comdeming ltw??? Why??? Prejudice???? Fair is fair you know.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> posted Oct. 05, 2003 04:13 PM
I have been quiet on this discussion board on the ISR/GOV subject for fear of sparking another personal attack and more threats.

However, today I am registering my vote and speaking out so that some of you that don't have the history can realize that this is more about two people's furthering their agenda then anything to do with the ISR/GOV issues. I think the registries have reached a settlement that everyone can live with a couple of years ago.

I have joined the current 53% and voted to ban the discussions as well. In the past year I have not read one new informative message about the ISR/GOV issue posted here that makes it worth holding these discussions.

However, I don't think banning this subject will fix the problem. I believe the only way you will fix the problem is if you ban the posters that continually cause the controversy. I suggest a poll to the membership to decide whether the troublemakers should be banned.

To give some of you a little history...

To date, these individuals who are new to Horse breeding and new to Oldenburg breeding have made it their personal mission to ruin the Oldenburg name in hopes of gaining enough consensus to file a lawsuit.

The more you support them, you support the cause they wish to further to win $$$$ against GOV to go in their personal pockets.

This year their beef is with GOV, last year it was with ISR. Who knows what or who the next target will be.

As soon as you shut this subject down these individuals will find a new platform and start a smear campaign against either a new cause, a new registry, COTH, a different farm or an individual.

I have watched the pattern for 3 years. I have watched two other bulletin boards be shut down because of this. I have watched numerous threats of lawsuits from these same individuals.

I was one of the targets of a smear campaign because I defended my opinion and dared to disagree. I have two threatening letters from these individuals in my file cabinet mailed to my home threatening me with a lawsuit or a settlement out of court. The threats got much nastier than that, and very personal.

Just by writing this post I am sure the threats and nasty campaign will start against me again. But I think it is important for the members of this bulletin board to know that personal threats are not acceptable just because you disagree with an individual on a public bulletin board.

I am an avid Hanoverian and Oldenburg breeder, rider and competitor. I have been for many years. I love my horses and have visited the German breeding areas many times.

However, these people have made being involved with Oldenburg horses, the organization and Oldenburg people no longer a joyful or fun experience. My stomach turns when I read the continual day after month after year harping and personal attacks on Oldenburg officials and breeders.

These individuals have never visited the Oldenburg area, they don't know the German horses, breeders, history or officials. Yet, there has been a systematic effort to destroy the Oldenburg name in the USA.

I own 4 Hanoverian mares and one Oldenburg mare. Yesterday, I took my one lovely German Oldenburg mare and had her inspected Hanoverian. She was accepted into the Hanoverian book with a very high score because she was of excellent quality. She had one of the highest scores of the day.

I never intended to inspect her Hanoverian when I bought her. I visited the Oldenburg area and got to know their history, horses, registry and was quite impressed by what I saw. I was dipping my little toe into the GOV world for the first time as I had already established a group of high quality States Premium and Elite Hanoverian mares.

I inspected this GOV mare with the Hanoverians not because I have any problems with the split of the ISR/GOV, not because I have any beef with Oldenburg. I have been a great supporter of GOV and have put up personal money for sponsorship of many GOV awards over the last 3 years, I respect the organization.

I had my mare inspected and approved Hanoverian because I am so sick and tired of the fact that two people have made it their full time job to ruin GOV and it's breeders.

When I read that no one wants to breed, own or buy an Oldenburg horse anymore it makes me very sad because of these arguments on this board and other boards over the last 3 years. The warmblood marketplace is VERY TIRED of this!

I have to take action to protect my breeding program so that I can continue to sell my foals and breed my mares. This makes me very sad, but this is the way it will have to be for now.

Laura Whitford
www.studbook.com/shadowfox (http://www.studbook.com/shadowfox) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

"There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man." Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

www.talloaksfarm.net (http://www.talloaksfarm.net)

can't re-

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:20 AM

I think it's time to change the rules and vote two people off the island!
I'll even donate a box of peeps from the registry of their choice!

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Et vera incessu patuit dea. (Aenid I, 405)
And her stride revealed she was a true goddess.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Castlegate

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:34 AM

Did you see Paradise Hotel? They have "twists" where you can vote 2 people off......

BelladonnaLily

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:35 AM

http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif As an innocent bystander who has been keeping up with this for a relatively short period of time...ltw does not appear to be instigating as some others are. I believe she just felt it was time to come out and express her opinion/experiences. She did not name names but the couple in question made darn sure I knew exactly who she was talking about. I have no first-hand knowledge of the couple of in question, but they do annoy the heck out of me so since the poll isn't exclusionary, I vote to throw them off the island.

can't re-

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:38 AM

Castlegate,

I think it should go more like this:

The herd has spoken....

You must pack up your bucket of oats and leave the pasture immediately....

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

But seriously, I have stayed out of this and have AHS mares and an OV mare.
Having this board is a priviledge. If a topic becomes so much of a hassle that owners are called, moderators threatened and harassed, lawsuits mentioned...it's just ridiculous. Take it somewhere else. This is not the place for that kind of hogwash!!!

Castlegate

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:41 AM

You have to vote to "throw" them off the island with a "pleasant conversation" and you must wish them well as their torch is extinguished.....they will actually get a pretty good deal though, did you ever think about that? If you get voted off early in the game you get to stay at a hotel wherever they are until the game is over...I would imagine expenses paid....hummmm.....

Castlegate

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:45 AM

Can't re- HOW FUNNY!!!!!

I can't deal with all of this contraversy....I TRY to stay out of it too.....doesn't always work though.....

The HERD has spoken....

Would have to have a horse trailer waiting at tribal concil too......

artienallie

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:50 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by pintofoal:
Let me ask those of you who have made such a statement as the one mentioned above and following; "I wouldn't want an Oldenburg after reading this forum" Why? is it because of: A) the behavior of "Oldenburg" people on forums and you'd be scared to meet them in a dark alley B) because you are confused about Oldenburgs and it makes your head spin C) because of the "split" of the registries, you just can't choose D) because you raise Dutch, Hans, TB's or whatevers and everything else is junk<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Liz, I'm mostly a lurker here on the SHB forum, but I lurk with a purpose. I have a mare I intend to breed in the future, and as such, I lurk here to learn about breeds, stallions, inspections and various other "paperwork" aspects of breeding.

I know some beautiful Oldenburg stallions. Many of whom I think would contribute greatly to my mare producing a wonderful foal. However, I doubt I will ever breed to an Oldenburg due to the intense out-and-out hate I've witnessed here and on various other forums regarding the Oldenburg registry split.

Just my two cents worth.

No trees were killed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.

talloaks

Oct. 6, 2003, 05:52 AM

BeladonnaLily,

in your post

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> As an innocent bystander who has been keeping up with this for a relatively short period of time...ltw does not appear to be instigating as some others are. I believe she just felt it was time to come out and express her opinion/experiences. She did not name names but the couple in question made darn sure I knew exactly who she was talking about. I have no first-hand knowledge of the couple of in question, but they do annoy the heck out of me so since the poll isn't exclusionary, I vote to throw them off the island. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Everyone on this thread knows exactly which indi viduals you are refering to, besides to my knowlege I don't think there is another couple posting here. You don't have to name names, just insinuating, with circumstances, is naming.

"There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man." Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

www.talloaksfarm.net (http://www.talloaksfarm.net)

[This message was edited by talloaks on Oct. 06, 2003 at 10:05 AM.]

SoEasy

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:05 AM

ENOUGH!

ltw's post ssys 'individuals' it does not, unless I am missing something, say 'couple'.

The purpose of this thread was NOT to allow or condone more personal attacks. The fact that the personal attacks are happening anyway speaks volumes ...

atom

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:08 AM

I voted also to ban this dicussion. This personal attacks and not accepted the opinion from other peoples , in my opinion this is not to tolerate from this board. I know some other boards and they were posters banned they make such attacks to other posters.
Another forum was closed about such attacks and I like this forum and learn a lot, but I think it is not the right place to discuss such things. If some people have problems with a association, other people or registry, then please discuss it with them and make this not public in such a way. To dicuss things is good and normal, but not with this attackings. It is enough !!!
And - the other registry was not shrunked about the rivalities they was shunken about other things. Please ask some posters here about their experiences with this registry and all would give the same answer to you. That is the reason is shrunked and IÂ´m sure you know this experiences that have the other breeders ! And the poster was banned that this people give negative postings. The other people was not banned, but they have not given such personal attackings to the other...

Mandy
Home of "Atom"
Equus Kinsky Warmblood

hansiska

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:10 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>...without any question people have formed opinions about me based on their statements. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
With all due respect, there is an EXCESSIVELY long record of each of your statements which clearly allows any and all of us to form an opinion of individuals posting here as well as opinions of this issue. I believe it is the latter that should concern us in attempting to make a decision on this vote.

As several posters have already stated the issues so well, I can only say that I agree that nothing new has been added to this issue in the course of, oh, the last ten threads about it (and this is perhaps the most important point).

Also, in every thread I've read about the subject, the debate quickly degrades into personal attack (FYI, this is not fun to read).

I am joining the argument late; I had no knowledge as to WHY there was a split in the O registries until I read about it here. For what it's worth, I originally felt that a certain poster was unfairly harangued, and PT'd her for the full story. As I understand it there's no way a ban on the subject prevents anyone from discussing it in PTs, so this is always an option for those who want to know more about anyone's opinion on the matter.

At any rate, it soon became clear to me that the "whole" story was a very, VERY subjective matter and that some parties here are actually taking legal action against x registry. As a result, it's almost impossible for the matter to be discussed objectively.

So, are we to be doomed to have any post which mentions ISR/OLDNA and GOV in the same sentence turn into a shooting match? Based on previous experience, yes we are. I suggested before that the issue mimic itself here by asking for a split in the breeding BB, and that the issue have its own board here (locked/archival or active, I don't care). As someone else put it, the issue is self-limiting.

Otherwise, I vote for at least a one-year moratorium. I can't stand to watch the board, the magazine, and its VOLUNTEER moderators attacked again and again. (BTW, if Erin WERE a rider or breeder of Oldenburgs I have a distinct feeling she'd be unduly maligned for THAT).

And one last thing: I want to go on the record for being immensely proud of my membership in the Chocolate Brigade. I am not friends with any Oldenburg breeder, of EITHER registry, and want it to be known that I am not part of any gang conjoined by any such agenda. I'm interested in learning about horse breeding, and, as I see it, discussion of this issue as it occurs on this board only inhibits that interest; at this point, I would no sooner pursue an Oldenburg approval than I'd buy a cattle prod.

I think the fact that the pettiness exhibited almost EVERY time the issue has been discussed has been effectively blocked by the equally petty discussion of CHOCOLATE is, in fact, SUBLIME. And a quick glance at those who contributed at those times shows quite a cross-section of posters, posters who took the moderators' job into their own hands. In a way, many of us have been voting for this all along.

Spot

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:17 AM

What a mess! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sigh.gif

I am not even going to venture into the who is right and who is wrong debate, but I do have a question

In polls such as this one, can you "load the ballot box" by voting as many times as you want, or does Erin, or someone see that I have voted "yes" or "no" 100 times, and negate all but one of those votes?

Or - each time that you vote - does it just show as "yes" or "no" with no user id attached?

Enquiring minds would like to know

"Spot"

SportArab

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:34 AM

OK... I voted not to ban the discussions. I'm not sure why all you folks who want them banned bother to open the threads when you know what they contain.

I personally believe that free discussion is the best situation. Nobody forces anyone to read these things.

Fiery Run Farm (http://www.fieryrunfarm.com)

mountain girl

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:44 AM

You can waste all day trying to follow one of these threads. What about talking about horses, instead?

from coastal Maine, where boatlovers rule, and horselovers ride.

Allyn M

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:48 AM

After having read all 7 pages of this I have to go back to Liz s original reply. Not only do public discussions of this nature affect these two registries ,but they affect all breeders of warmblood sport horses as well. We must all work doubly hard now to convince people that our main purpose is to provide a great sport horse for American riders.
It reminds me of when I had just become a real estate agent and went to the first farm on a "For sale by owmer " and the farmers wife said to me " I am not going to list with a Realtor ;all Realtors are crooks !" I came home to tell my husband that I did not think I could be in a business with such a reputation and he said " there are crooked people in every business ; now you have to work doubly hard to prove you are not one of them or if you can't stand the heat you'll have to get out of the kitchen " quoting from Harry Truman .

At any rate you can see what I am getting at here .... It does the American breeding business no good to continue these discussions as it makes it look like we are more interested in a registry than in raising good horses and these registries are based on areas in Europe .How ridiculous must that look to the average person. I am a believer in free speech but when it digresses to the infantile level it is better turned off.

Allyn McCracken
Sport Horse Breeder
www.bannockburnfarmllc.com (http://www.bannockburnfarmllc.com)

[This message was edited by Allyn M on Oct. 06, 2003 at 10:14 AM.]

Erin

Oct. 6, 2003, 06:51 AM

Spot, there's no record of who votes... just what you see when you click on the "results" button. (i.e. X number of votes and the percentages for each poll option.)

But each username is allowed only one vote. You have to be signed in to vote, and once you vote with that username, you can't vote again with it.

fleur

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:05 AM

I personally find these discussions interesting and I think personal attacks here should be treated like they are on any other forum--temporarily restrict the poster's posting priveleges and give them a time-out!

FWIW I totally agree with Oakleigh about how annoying the chocolate posts are. maybe they are useful for trolls, but SO unnecessary in purely heated discussions. JMHO... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

arnika

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:18 AM

SportArab, it really isn't a question of someone just not opening the threads. Not only do the moderators have to constantly read each and every post to edit out the personal attacks, the posters have repeatedly threatened legal action to COTH. This has been done on two or three other boards which resulted in the forums being closed down. I LOFF COTH and would be very distressed if it were forced to close. I am more than willing to agree to WHATEVER it takes to keep that from happening. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

FionaJ

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:19 AM

Erin,

I voted NO but after reading all this and understanding how it effects the moderators, others, and what little purpose it really has other than hashing up bad feelings, I'd like to change my vote to YES--I think the discussions should be banned.

fleur

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:23 AM

Erin--since one of the main issues here seems to be the threat of legal action, can you shed some light on whether this would even be possible? aren't there disclaimers everywhere saying "this is not the opinion or view of the COTH". is there any possibility of these threats of lawsuits becoming more than just threats?

Erin

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:36 AM

Well, would you ever have thought McDonalds would be liable for millions of dollars because someone spilled hot coffee? Gee, who would have thought coffee would be hot? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The laws on the books have been tested over and over again when it comes to traditional media... television, film, print, radio, etc. Everyone knows how the law is usually applied, so newspapers and other media outlets employ lawyers to tell them where the lines are, and they don't (usually) cross them.

Unfortunately, the laws have not yet been tested in regard to the Internet. No one is really sure how courts will interpret things. So yes, it is certainly possible for someone to sue COTH over what is said here. I think it's unlikely that they'd win, but COTH really doesn't want to have to spend tons of money and time to find that out.

That's why we have such strict rules regarding allegations of illegal or abusive behavior, and what we consider to be a "fact." They're probably way more restrictive than they legally need to be, but we'd rather be on the safe side.

Yes, we do have disclaimers, but so did the McDonalds coffee cups.

(And yes, you guys over on TTR need to be aware of all this as well.)

Spot

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:36 AM

fleur - I think honestly while the threat of lawsuits is one of the issues, I think the fact that life is too short to constantly have to babysit individuals who are incapable of conducting themselves in a decent and intelligent fashion, wears thin and has probably done so a long time ago.

I couldnt imagine going to lunch or going to bed and coming back here to wade through another 30 posts that occured since you last were on the board, to see if any need to be deleted, edited, post warnings, etc.

Go to the bathroom - same thing - another 5 to go through, fire off a few more warnings, send emails to the offending parties, ask them to back off.

Go to a meeting -come back an hour later to find you need to repeat step 2 once again as the offending parties ignored your warnings, ignored your emails, etc.

When is enough just plain enough?

For the record - I voted that I want the discussions to stop even if for a period of 6-12 months. Then - they can be re-introduced and if they denigrate to a battleground once again, time to enact a new moratorium for a period of 6-12 months on this subject once again. Maybe in this fashion, all parties concerned will realize, in simple terms, that if they play nice - the forums can stay open and if they dont, they have to wait another 6-12 months to make their views known once again.

I too, appreciate this free forum and opportunity to interact with other COTH members. I would never want the Powers To Be to ever be in a position where moderating, babysitting and refereeing this forum was more hassle than it was worth, and the decision made to shut it down

"Spot"

DMK

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:38 AM

fleur, it still costs money to call up one's lawyer to tell them about the latest idiotic threat of lawsuit issued by someone who doesn't have the common sense God gave a gnat.

The downside of living in a democracy is your are entitled to waste everyone's time with meritless legal actions and pointless exercises of free speech.

Call your village. Their idiot is missing...

HeyYouNags

Oct. 6, 2003, 07:47 AM

So, what would be the legal implications of banning posters who threaten lawsuits? (Serious question.)

In this particular case, I really don't think the banned individuals would be mentioned or derided in their absence. They would be quickly forgotten.

There's no legal precedence that says you *have* to allow someone on your message board, right? COTH could ban for any or no reason at all, couldn't they?

Other times, obnoxious posters have been chased off the board by annoyed regulars bearing flaming torches, or chocolate, or roast baby. It's just that certain parasites seem resistant to traditional therapy. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

NOOOO!!! Don't ban meeeeee!!!!! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Erin

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:00 AM

Just to give everyone an update, since the poll results do not reflect the changed votes...

By my math, we have 100 "yes" votes to 77 "no" votes at this point in time (that takes into account the changed votes). That's 56.5 percent for and 43.5 against.

(If I've made an egregious math error, someone please feel free to correct me! http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

We'll keep taking votes until this evening.

dancinglite

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:07 AM

I have been following this thread from the beginning and the thread it refers to. I realy could not care less about which individual threatened which one. I don't breed Oldenbergs but one can never tell what might happen in the future. I do like to be aware of registry requirements and if questions can be posed with civil straightforward answers everyone benefits.
You know this is almost as bad as the 169 posts that were recorded on the warmblood forum and where to register draft crosses (as warmbloods?).

It was never shut down (probably should have been as the language got very colorful).

http://community.webshots.com/user/dancinglite

Erin

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:22 AM

HYN, I really don't know what the legal implications would be. It certainly would be nice to be able to tell people, "Obviously you're not enjoying your COTH experience, and so we've taken the liberty of removing your posting privileges and wish you the best of luck elsewhere." http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I'll ask COTH about it.

Portia

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:23 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by HeyYouNags:
So, what would be the legal implications of banning posters who threaten lawsuits? (Serious question.) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
That's a very good question, HYN, and (as you might guess) another problem. The bottom line is that we've tried in the past to ban certain posters on the SHB forum who broke the rules, ignored the moderators' multiple warnings, caused great controversy, and made threats of litigation -- and they then immediately called the COTH (and me directly), and made further threats of litigation because they were banned and "couldn't defend themselves."

These people complained because we edited threads, and complained because we didn't edit threads. They then complained when we deleted entire threads because they wanted us to delete any post about them or their organization that they considered to be negative but still leave any post by them or their defenders saying what they considered to be positive things about them. And they threatened to sue the COTH and the moderators individually over all of it.

It's an old saying among litigators (and I'm an old litigator http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ) that "it only takes a piece of paper and 100 bucks to file a lawsuit." What that means is, our system of law allows anyone to bring a lawsuit, regardless of its merit under the facts or the law. It is then up to the defendant(s) to prove that the claim is without merit, and that inevitable costs time, aggravation, and money. Sometimes lots of money.

Under "the American Rule" (as opposed to "the English Rule" followed in Great Britain and Canada), the defendant is generally responsible for its own costs, regardless of how frivolous the plaintiff's claims may be. Thus, the plaintiff has little downside risk to filing a suit, other than its own expenses. Sure, sometimes a judge grows a pair http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif and sanctions the plaintiffs for frivolous claims, but that is much rarer than you might imagine and very seldom allows the defendants to recover all or a majority of their costs. As an example, see this HORSE RELATED litigation story: Our Emblem Lawsuit Story (http://www.dailylocal.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=10262126&BRD=1671&PAG=461&dept_id=17782&rfi=6) Look at the numbers in that case: The plaintiffs and their lawyers were sanctioned $30,000, but Claiborne incurred legal expenses of over $200,000.

There are people who have learned the power of even threatening litigation, regardless of lack of merit, and they use that power. The only way I can personally see to begin to avoid the threats is to ban the offending topics of discussion entirely.

I'm a big girl, I can defend myself (quite literally http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), so the threats don't mean so much to me. But the COTH is a business and providing us with our little playground may not be worth the risk to them.

Fallbrook

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:26 AM

Here's another change from No to Yes.

While I'm always delighted to take on a pompous ass or two, I do think this topic has shown that it doesn't pay to match wits with an unarmed man (or woman). Too much time and effort is required to monitor the discussions, and although I think a gag rule will only serve to spare some posters repercussions from their own bad behavior, it is the right thing to do.

As for legal action, I think any party here would be hard pressed to prove damage that wasn't self-inflicted.

Jeannette, formerly ponygyrl

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:34 AM

A moratorium and an archive sounds sane to me. Maybe the passage of a little time would help, or at least give the mods a break?? I'm not personally affected directly by the war, and OK, I'll admit I've done my share of rubbernecking at the battles, so to speak, but shutting down COTH would be a very bad thing in my book...

Black Market Radio

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:42 AM

WOW. I started to read these threads awhole back and my head spun! I have been in the middle of some major controversies, but we ended up agreeing to disagree. I think THAT is the difference here. Every once in awhile, a thread comes up about ear bunnies and tack nosebands and other things I don't agree with, but I don't post to them anymore!

It seems even THIS thread has turned into another fight about it. Would I not buy an Oldenburg because of these threads? I don't know that. It would have to be an exceptional animal though. I would be more likely to look at other breeds first. Not because I don't like Olds, I think there are some beautiful ones out there, esp. the Pinto varieties as I am a sucker for spots! But because it seems that there is nothing but trouble wherever the "o" word is brought up...

Here are the Devilpups!!
http://community.webshots.com/user/angelgregory87

I FART in your general direction TTTTTTTTTHHHHHHHHBBBBBBB!!!!!

Oldenburg Mom

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:50 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> There are people who have learned the power of even threatening litigation, regardless of lack of merit, and they use that power. The only way I can personally see to begin to avoid the threats is to ban the offending topics of discussion entirely. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The vast majority of posters on this BB are seeking information, have no agenda to promote, nor registry/person/organization to trash.

If this is what it takes to keep the few from spoiling it for the many, go for it. The people who genuinely use this BB for what it was intended won't care a fig.

The adventure has begun...
KT

P.S. In case you were wondering, the more people I get to know, the more I loff my horsie.

khobstetter

Oct. 6, 2003, 08:57 AM

I vote we leave the COTH BB OPEN for these discussions...

Ragtime is a Hannovarian Stallion who is the proud papa of several Oldenburg babies, "THE" Dr has had many mares and foals over the years mostly inspected into "the" registeries.

I was the agent the entire time Ragtime was owned by the Dr. I trained him, showed him, dragged him around to be collected, tested, semen frozen and stored, shown and so on. I also took the mares and babies the the Inspections..ad nauseaum.

I travel to Germany at least 6-10 times a year and ALWAYS go to the Verband's to visit and see the wonderful people involved there. Carsten is a good friend of myself and mostly the Dr....
I understand their registeries and the reasons they do what they do the way they do it....

I also handle all of the Dr's foals and go the the Inspections ad nauseaum,,,,HERE IS MY OWN OPINION!!!!

STOP THE BICKERING, OFFER YOUR OPINION AND GET ON WITH GOOD SPORT HORSE BREEDING!!!

Different opinions are the main stay of America...talking about things is our right!!!

I for one appreciate this thread...IF IF IF I could cut out the nastyness and personal attacks. I have been aware of the "split" as I drag these babies and mares around but to get a direct answer would take years of traveling and calling and asking questions.

THIS THREAD has provided some invaluable insight into the problem with the 2 registeries that I have NOT been able to figure out before. Sure I had to read through the mud slinging and personal attacks BUT I got some answers today and I REALLY APPRECIATE GETTING BOTH SIDES !!

PLEASE don't ban these discussions...let's just keep it a discussion and not personal....

Maybe someone else will get educated about the process and the way we arrived to where we are today...

http://www.foxpointefarm.com
http://www.go-sho.org

Nikita

Oct. 6, 2003, 09:08 AM

And I vote to do whatever is necessary to simply keep the COTH board OPEN to all.
The solution has already been suggested and is just a *click* (http://groups.yahoo.com/) away.

Said of course, in a most pleasant way. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Caution: I can go from 0 to b*tch in 2.1 seconds.

Coreene

Oct. 6, 2003, 09:31 AM

I just think the following thing is good to remember: posting on the COTH BB is a privilege, not a right.

lilblackhorse

Oct. 6, 2003, 09:49 AM

I vote yes to ban-as I said on OC, I never come here, don't plan to ever buy an Oldenburg. However, when tensions and poopiness over here on SHB threaten the COTH bb as a whole, I think things are out of hand.

If people can't discuss things rationally without threats of lawsuits, then the subject should be off the table. I say archive the relevant threads in the past and move on.

aimee

Elippses Users Clique........Co-Founder Occularly Challenged Equine Support Group, and now the Bowed Tendon Clique

"And how's that working for ya?" Dr. Phil

"What the fuh?" Robby Johnson

elizabeth

Oct. 6, 2003, 09:58 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by DMK:
fleur, it still costs money to call up one's lawyer to tell them about the latest idiotic threat of lawsuit issued by someone who doesn't have the common sense God gave a gnat.

The downside of living in a democracy is your are entitled to waste everyone's time with meritless legal actions and pointless exercises of free speech.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Dude, with all due respect, making comments like that is guaranteed to piss off folks (likely those without the afore-mentioned gnat-level common sense) and incite them even further (perhaps prompting more meritless lawsuits http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ). Why would you even go down that road? (Rhetorical question.) Just one more headache you cannot POSSIBLY need. . . . http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

So, to that end, I will go and vote that we ALLOW Old. discussions, but I will make the following suggestions (they are just humble, uneducated SUGGESTIONS):
If you do not have anything useful to add on the Old. debate, it might serve you well to stay out of the conversation and just avoid the fire.
If you have no desire to engage in a protracted, painful discussion on the topic, stay out of the conversation and just avoid the grief.
If you truly feel that the folks having the conversation lack even a gnat-esque level of common sense, stay out of the conversation and avoid engaging in a debate that is likely to frustrate you.

I think if lots of folks just stay out of the heated debates, on the belief either that it is a controversial topic that gets ugly and is therefore not worth the effort or the parties having the conversations are not the most . . . uh. . . rational-convesation-desiring folks, the ugly discussions will peter out, having no fuel for their fire, so to speak.

I do not support banning this discussion because, shoot, how long will it be before we ban MANY controversial subjects? That, in my view, is no good.

My sense is that the folks on the Old. threads got annoyed that Erin and other mods. jumped in with heavy hands, so to speak. I could be wrong, but that is my sense. Would the solution therefore be to just allow the Old.-passion-driven debaters to so debate, provided they did so without hurting each other, and the rest of us, who have no interest in the topic and no dog in the fight, just stay out of the fray? And if the folks on that thread were pestering Erin and the mods. just because there was disagreement on the thread as to the substance and value of the different registeries, well, then, shame on those folks. Why not discuss the issues rationally using self-moderation and keep the time of the mods. reserved for more critical issues?

Just my view. I hope I've not offended anyone with it.

[This message was edited by elizabeth on Oct. 06, 2003 at 01:20 PM.]

HeyYouNags

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:00 AM

I guess I would be willing to change my no to a yes, just to spare COTH and the moderators from perforating stomach ulcers.

It's just... it's just... I hate it when the bad guys win! It's like being back in first grade, and some tattle-tale makes the whole class get detention.

Or in more modern terms, some whiny-arse parent gets chocolate banned from the entire school, because little Junior has allergies. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

talloaks

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:06 AM

Well it looks to me as if this poll has just invalidated itself. If people can say I voted no and now I want to vote yes and Erin goes ahead and changes the vote, I would say the poll has been tampered with. Like politics again!!! http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Earlier it was reported, or a question about the voting answered, that there was no way to know who voted for yes or who voted no. Therefore those who are chainging their vote may very well be voting the same thing twice.

I see a corrupt poll!! I would think the results will not be worth a grain of salt!!! JMHO

"There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man." Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

www.talloaksfarm.net (http://www.talloaksfarm.net)

DMK

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:09 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by elizabeth:
Why would you even go down that road? (Rhetorical question.) Just one more headache you cannot POSSIBLY need. . . . http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably for the same reason you drew attention to it in boldface. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Call your village. Their idiot is missing...

elizabeth

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:19 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by DMK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by elizabeth:
Why would you even go down that road? (Rhetorical question.) Just one more headache you cannot POSSIBLY need. . . . http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Probably for the same reason you drew attention to it in boldface. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Huh? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif My bold was on my comments to you, not your comments regarding the gnat-esque folks, but I can go take the bold away - I don't mind doing that.

Feel free to PT me if you are getting something from my comments that I didn't intend. My only point was the tongue-in-cheek one - folks who are riled up for a lawsuit are now going to gripe that you referred to them as having the common sense of gnats, and you canot possibly want that additional delight. http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/winkgrin.gif

Edited to add that I would be happy to cut that whole post if you want me to. No offense was intended. . . .

Erin

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:22 AM

Talloaks, do you really think that people are so worked up about this that they're scheming ways to skew the poll? http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I said from the get-go that the poll was not foolproof, but it's the best we have. There has NOT been a huge influx of new members over the past two days, and there has NOT been a flood of votes on the poll.

As I said earlier, I do not have the power to change the vote tally, which is why I'm simply noting the number of changed votes on the initial post, as well as WHO requested their vote be changed. It's a total of SIX VOTES, and they were not cast by people who have any huge stake in the outcome or any agenda. I really doubt that they secretly voted yes and are now lying about wanting to change their votes in order to bump the "yes" vote up by one measly vote.

And even without those six votes being changed, I'd say the people have spoken pretty clearly.

fleur

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:29 AM

Erin, don't you think there are plenty of people who would vote to ban all helmet threads? all mention of paul valliere? any thread containing "junior-speak"? I understand that this particular issue causes trouble for the moderators, but is it really fair to ban a whole topic from the BB?

talloaks

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:30 AM

Erin, I was just pointing out a fact. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Okay!! You'd think you thought my life depended on this, but it surely doesn't."Good Grief" as Charlie Brown would say.

I happen to be a "fact" person, and wanted to point this out before anyone else decided that maybe the outcome was not legitimate. That's all. Don't worry, no ulterior motives!!

"There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man." Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

www.talloaksfarm.net (http://www.talloaksfarm.net)

elizabeth

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:31 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Erin:
And even without those six votes being changed, I'd say the people have spoken pretty clearly.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Erin, truth be told, why do you even CARE what "the people" think? I mean, you run the BB as the administrator as you see fit, according to your professional judgement and within your discretion. If you see fit to close threads on this topic, or shut them when they get too ugly, so be it. That's the way it is with all topics here. So be it. Lots of folks don't agree with you on lots of decisions, but the rule has always been "if you don't like it, leave."

I'll go re-read your initial post on this thread to see if it answers my question, but, if not, please explain why you even care about bringing this to a vote. What makes this different from the other decisions you make within your discretion as "el jeffe" of this board?

Castlegate

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:32 AM

Fleur, I was waiting for someone to bring that up!

Erin: Personally I voted NO but I really don't care what COTH moderators decide.....

But please keep in mind what I said earlier...we will have another topic somewhere down the line that will cause the same heart-aches....

Some of the folks that are looking for a fight will find one somewhere else if that is what they are looking for....

Just do whatever is necessary to keep the board alive and well for those of us that really enjoy all of the positive things it brings....

Erin

Oct. 6, 2003, 10:54 AM

Elizabeth, I asked for a vote because this is such an extreme step to take. As I said before, if there were overwhelming interest in allowing these debates to continue, then it might outweigh the grief it causes the moderators.

We have tried the traditional methods of moderating these threads. The Chocolate Brigade has tried less traditional methods. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif This isn't simply a case of "if you don't like it, don't read it."

We have actually done this once before... there as a temporary moratorium on approved vs. unapproved helmet threads for a while, right around the time when the rule went into effect.

And fleur, for every topic on the BB, there's someone who hates that topic and wishes there was a ban on it. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif That's why *I* started this poll. It IS the moderators' decision, but we're asking for some input before we make it. If a BB member starts a poll asking whether helmet threads should be banned, I'm going to tell them tough toenails, it's the moderators' decision, not theirs.

This is a unique situation, and unfortunately, it might require a rather extreme solution that we wouldn't ordinarily employ on these forums. So, I wanted to make sure that we wouldn't be upsetting the majority of the forum by doing it. That's why I started the poll.

Foxhound

Oct. 6, 2003, 11:02 AM

I own a German bred Oldenburg, so I guess I am one of those most affected by this issue. I didn't even realize what a serious issue it was until I started reading all these threads. A good friend at the barn has an Oldenburg-NA registered horse. Now that I am aware of the severity of the issue, I feel the need to let the air out of her trailer tires in retaliation. http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

If the Old-NA vs. GOV threads threaten the existance of the BB, then ban them. Or just ban the worst offenders, those who can't stop themselves from turning any newbie thread about why we have 2 registries into a flame war.

------------------
Don't breed or buy while others die.
Save a life, adopt a pet!

WIndward_1998

Oct. 6, 2003, 11:20 AM

Let's just shoot anyone who brings it up again http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif. It would cause less blood shed.

The whole thing has gone beyond nuts.

Two minutes to Glory, hoping the judge isn't blind.

Spot

Oct. 6, 2003, 11:30 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR> Let's just shoot anyone who brings it up again . It would cause less blood shed.

The whole thing has gone beyond nuts <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Gawd - I really LIKE your style. No muss. No fuss. Just cut right to the chase. Call a spade a spade.

"Spot"

Dodge's still suck, though ... http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

NoGreatMischief

Oct. 6, 2003, 11:36 AM

http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/sleepy.gif

WIndward_1998

Oct. 6, 2003, 11:42 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Gawd - I really LIKE your style. No muss. No fuss. Just cut right to the chase. Call a spade a spade.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would be a shovel, not a spade http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/lol.gif

Two minutes to Glory, hoping the judge isn't blind.

JER

Oct. 6, 2003, 12:13 PM

IMO, this poll should not be brought to the membership at all. The Oldenburg discussion is not relevant to most members' experience on the CoTH boards.

If individual members are making threats to moderators, they should be warned and then, if they continue to cause trouble, banned from participation on the BB. I'm curious to hear the CoTH says about banning individuals from the boards. It has been done in the past -- I would think that a threat to a moderator would be enough cause for banishment.

Banning a horse-relevant topic from discussion on the boards is an extreme step. Banning offensive/threatening/harrassing individuals from participation on the boards seems to be a more effective way of addressing the problem.

fleur

Oct. 6, 2003, 12:45 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by JER:
Banning a horse-relevant topic from discussion on the boards is an extreme step. Banning offensive/threatening/harrassing individuals from participation on the boards seems to be a more effective way of addressing the problem.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hear, hear! exactly how I feel.

WIndward_1998

Oct. 6, 2003, 12:47 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by fleur:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by JER:
Banning a horse-relevant topic from discussion on the boards is an extreme step. Banning offensive/threatening/harrassing individuals from participation on the boards seems to be a more effective way of addressing the problem.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

hear, hear! exactly how I feel.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree, but if I call someone an overbearing lout will I get expelled from the BB?????

Two minutes to Glory, hoping the judge isn't blind.

Snowbird

Oct. 6, 2003, 12:50 PM

I am also opposed to any banning of a topic. If there are people who can not behave in a civilized way then the people and not the topic should be banned.

I think someone might consider being banned more embarrassing than participating in a pointless and hurtful dialog. Sadly, good manners and courtesy are sometimes in short supply along with a minimum vocabulary.

Battle Scarred Veteran

Future Breeder

Oct. 6, 2003, 01:16 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Snowbird:
I am also opposed to any banning of a topic. If there are people who can not behave in a civilized way then the people and not the topic should be banned.

I think someone might consider being banned more embarrassing than participating in a pointless and hurtful dialog. Sadly, good manners and courtesy are sometimes in short supply along with a minimum vocabulary.

_Battle Scarred Veteran_<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amen.

khobstetter

Oct. 6, 2003, 01:24 PM

HERE HERE SNOWBIRD......you GO GIRL!!!!!!

I AGREE I AGREE I AGREE I AGREE..... http://chronicleforums.com/images/custom_smilies/yes.gif

http://www.foxpointefarm.com
http://www.go-sho.org

DMK

Oct. 6, 2003, 01:42 PM

elizabeth, I knew your reply was tongue in cheek, as was my reply to you...

Call your village. Their idiot is missing...

Tom King

Oct. 6, 2003, 02:07 PM

The lawsuit worries are almost as overboard as the GOV/Not Affiliated argument. A Motion to Dismiss would be a quick end to any such suit. I'm not a lawyer but I have sued one.

stegall

Oct. 6, 2003, 03:04 PM

Well, I have been watching the entire thread from the opening, and have been reluctant to post.

My very first impression when I saw the intial poll request was no, we shouldn't ban a topic. The die hard and opinionated freedom of speech defender in me always is affronted by restrictions opinion, no matter how small.

However, as I read and considered each post, I began to realize some things: first as Oakleigh pointed out-freedom of speech deals with the government. COTH is privately owned, and we play here at their indulgence. Regardless of what anyone thinks, the ultimate choice belongs with COTH and the moderators. They could close the BB altogther should they feel the need (and I feverantly hope they don't ever feel the need http://chronicleforums.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif). That being said, I also appreciate their allowing us some input into the issue.

Liz also made some comments that I feel were useful, and she does have a stake in the breeding aspect of these registries.

I do not personally know any of those involved either in the discussions that have taken place, or those who are breeding Oldenburgs, but I do feel I still have a piece in this problem. I must respectfully disagree with Cartier's thoughts that those who are not directly involved in breeding these horses should not participate in the discussion. While I may not breed GOV or Old NA horses, I do breed. And, more importantly, this has caused a rift in the horse community, which gives bad press to the outside world,and potentially drives away clients and thus causes an overall negative economic impact. So,therefore, it affects all horse people when you step back and look at the big picture. Much like the USET/USAEq dispute hurt the industry-this issue does too.

Additionally, the potency of this issue has even affected this immediate topic-people have already shown signs of "bad vibes".

So, while I never in my life thought I would say it, but maybe we should, temporarily at least, put the topic to rest, and agree to disagree. There are multitudes of other topics to discuss, lets move forward and make use of the bandwidth graciously provided by COTH on more productive topics.