• Welcome to the Chronicle Forums.
    Please complete your profile. The forums and the rest of www.chronofhorse.com has single sign-in, so your log in information for one will automatically work for the other. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of The Chronicle of the Horse.

Announcement

Collapse

Forum rules and no-advertising policy

As a participant on this forum, it is your responsibility to know and follow our rules. Please read this message in its entirety.

Board Rules

1. You’re responsible for what you say.
As outlined in Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, The Chronicle of the Horse and its affiliates, as well Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd., the developers of vBulletin, are not legally responsible for statements made in the forums.

This is a public forum viewed by a wide spectrum of people, so please be mindful of what you say and who might be reading it—details of personal disputes are likely better handled privately. While posters are legally responsible for their statements, the moderators may in their discretion remove or edit posts that violate these rules. Users have the ability to modify or delete their own messages after posting, but administrators generally will not delete posts, threads or accounts upon request.

Outright inflammatory, vulgar, harassing, malicious or otherwise inappropriate statements and criminal charges unsubstantiated by a reputable news source or legal documentation will not be tolerated and will be dealt with at the discretion of the moderators.

2. Conversations in horse-related forums should be horse-related.
The forums are a wonderful source of information and support for members of the horse community. While it’s understandably tempting to share information or search for input on other topics upon which members might have a similar level of knowledge, members must maintain the focus on horses.

3. Keep conversations productive, on topic and civil.
Discussion and disagreement are inevitable and encouraged; personal insults, diatribes and sniping comments are unproductive and unacceptable. Whether a subject is light-hearted or serious, keep posts focused on the current topic and of general interest to other participants of that thread. Utilize the private message feature or personal email where appropriate to address side topics or personal issues not related to the topic at large.

4. No advertising in the discussion forums.
Posts in the discussion forums directly or indirectly advertising horses, jobs, items or services for sale or wanted will be removed at the discretion of the moderators. Use of the private messaging feature or email addresses obtained through users’ profiles for unsolicited advertising is not permitted.

Company representatives may participate in discussions and answer questions about their products or services, or suggest their products on recent threads if they fulfill the criteria of a query. False "testimonials" provided by company affiliates posing as general consumers are not appropriate, and self-promotion of sales, ad campaigns, etc. through the discussion forums is not allowed.

Paid advertising is available on our classifieds site and through the purchase of banner ads. The tightly monitored Giveaways forum permits free listings of genuinely free horses and items available or wanted (on a limited basis). Items offered for trade are not allowed.

Advertising Policy Specifics
When in doubt of whether something you want to post constitutes advertising, please contact a moderator privately in advance for further clarification. Refer to the following points for general guidelines:

Horses – Only general discussion about the buying, leasing, selling and pricing of horses is permitted. If the post contains, or links to, the type of specific information typically found in a sales or wanted ad, and it’s related to a horse for sale, regardless of who’s selling it, it doesn’t belong in the discussion forums.

Stallions – Board members may ask for suggestions on breeding stallion recommendations. Stallion owners may reply to such queries by suggesting their own stallions, only if their horse fits the specific criteria of the original poster. Excessive promotion of a stallion by its owner or related parties is not permitted and will be addressed at the discretion of the moderators.

Services – Members may use the forums to ask for general recommendations of trainers, barns, shippers, farriers, etc., and other members may answer those requests by suggesting themselves or their company, if their services fulfill the specific criteria of the original post. Members may not solicit other members for business if it is not in response to a direct, genuine query.

Products – While members may ask for general opinions and suggestions on equipment, trailers, trucks, etc., they may not list the specific attributes for which they are in the market, as such posts serve as wanted ads.

Event Announcements – Members may post one notification of an upcoming event that may be of interest to fellow members, if the original poster does not benefit financially from the event. Such threads may not be “bumped” excessively. Premium members may post their own notices in the Event Announcements forum.

Charities/Rescues – Announcements for charitable or fundraising events can only be made for 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations. Special exceptions may be made, at the moderators’ discretion and direction, for board-related events or fundraising activities in extraordinary circumstances.

Occasional posts regarding horses available for adoption through IRS-registered horse rescue or placement programs are permitted in the appropriate forums, but these threads may be limited at the discretion of the moderators. Individuals may not advertise or make announcements for horses in need of rescue, placement or adoption unless the horse is available through a recognized rescue or placement agency or government-run entity or the thread fits the criteria for and is located in the Giveaways forum.

5. Do not post copyrighted photographs unless you have purchased that photo and have permission to do so.

6. Respect other members.
As members are often passionate about their beliefs and intentions can easily be misinterpreted in this type of environment, try to explore or resolve the inevitable disagreements that arise in the course of threads calmly and rationally.

If you see a post that you feel violates the rules of the board, please click the “alert” button (exclamation point inside of a triangle) in the bottom left corner of the post, which will alert ONLY the moderators to the post in question. They will then take whatever action, or no action, as deemed appropriate for the situation at their discretion. Do not air grievances regarding other posters or the moderators in the discussion forums.

Please be advised that adding another user to your “Ignore” list via your User Control Panel can be a useful tactic, which blocks posts and private messages by members whose commentary you’d rather avoid reading.

7. We have the right to reproduce statements made in the forums.
The Chronicle of the Horse may copy, quote, link to or otherwise reproduce posts, or portions of posts, in print or online for advertising or editorial purposes, if attributed to their original authors, and by posting in this forum, you hereby grant to The Chronicle of the Horse a perpetual, non-exclusive license under copyright and other rights, to do so.

8. We reserve the right to enforce and amend the rules.
The moderators may delete, edit, move or close any post or thread at any time, or refrain from doing any of the foregoing, in their discretion, and may suspend or revoke a user’s membership privileges at any time to maintain adherence to the rules and the general spirit of the forum. These rules may be amended at any time to address the current needs of the board.

Please see our full Terms of Service and Privacy Policy for more information.

Thanks for being a part of the COTH forums!

(Revised 1/26/16)
See more
See less

DressageDaily article re rule change proposal

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DressageDaily article re rule change proposal

    I suggested to Mary Phelps that she put something up on her website and she said several people had emailed her about this issue.

    My contribution to the cause of getting the word out:

    http://dressagedaily.com/2008/dd_200...0109-usef.html

    California Dressage Society (5000 members) and Potomac Valley Dressage Association (over 1000 members) both wrote letters expressing concern about and opposition to the proposed rule change, and those are at the USEF convention in Louisville right now with representatives who will distribute them.

  • #2
    Interesting. We're supposed to support a qualification system that doesn't exist yet. Sorry, but I don't support anything that I can't read first. Who do we e-mail to express our displeasure?
    In loving memory of Laura Jahnke.
    A life lived by example, done too soon.
    www.caringbridge.org/page/laurajahnke/

    Comment

    • Original Poster

      #3
      ESG, you're arriving very late to this party. This has been widely discussed and debated on this and UDBB for the past month.

      Check out some of the other threads on this BB re this issue. The USEF Board of Directors will vote on the rule change proposal this week--they are meeting right now in Louisville.

      Other threads here have lists of USEF BoD and Dressage Committee emails, but they are all at the convention and may not be checking their email. I would still send email if you have comments for them.

      You can try getting ahold of the hotel where the convention is (it's on the USEF website under 2008 convention, it's in Louisville but I can't remember off the top of my head the name of it) and see how you could fax a letter. You can call USEF or USDF and find out how to get a message or letter to people there.

      You can also try emailing acook@usef.org That is Abigail Cook, the person at USEF in charge of collecting comments and distributing them to the Dressage Committee. Put in the subject line of the email that it's important and about 275-07. Maybe she'll print it and give it to them.

      You can also try emailing a letter to davenport@saber.net with the same subject line in the email. That's Connie Davenport, who is along with a CDS contingent at the convention to address this issue. She might be able to print your email or letter and distribute it for you.

      Comment


      • #4
        Rebecca,

        Thank you for updating and organizing all the information, and showing the way to make our opinions heard.

        Good article.
        Last edited by claire; Jan. 9, 2008, 11:06 AM.

        Comment


        • #6
          Thank you, Rebecca!

          I am somewhat chagrined at the "Mom-knows-best' attitude of the USEF DC.

          We ALL love our sport and we ALL want to see the sport grow in positive ways.

          It does make me wonder a bit that no one on the DC seems to recognize that there can be any viewpoint but the version they have chosen.

          In any case, I hope people continue to write to the BoD, whatever viewpoint you wish to uphold.

          Sure, this proposal has received more public interest than just about all the other rule change proposals combined. This proposal is about the future of the sport, the road we all will take.
          It never occurred to me that the decision as to which road we all take would ever be in the hands of a few, unchosen-by-the-membership committee members.

          Please -- in NO WAY am I denigrating the hard work and time and energy that the committee has put into their work. Certainly, they love the sport as much or more as do we all .
          one oak, lots of canyons

          http://horsesportnews.wordpress.com/

          Comment


          • #7
            My apologies, rebecca. I didn't realize there were prerequisites to posting on this thread. As it happens, I've been aware of the proposed rule change for quite some time. Since you posted so prominently, I was under the impression that this was something new and enlightening. Sorry to have wasted bandwidth, asking stupid questions.
            In loving memory of Laura Jahnke.
            A life lived by example, done too soon.
            www.caringbridge.org/page/laurajahnke/

            Comment


            • #8
              I feel like I have been under a rock, why didn't my GMO know something of this(NCDCTA). I showed all year, went to an Arthur Kottas clinic in July in Charlottesville, VA, I would have thought that I would have heard a comment or two.

              Why wouldn't this go thru the USDF since they have access to all of the membership the rule would pertain to?

              If they decide at the USEF convention to go thru with this, if we get 30% of members or 20% of GMO's to go against this, then we can have the rule reversed. I'm going by the way the rule states on the USEF website.

              I am fairly certain of my facts if not, just want all to know, I am not above being corrected.
              Racheal

              Comment


              • #9
                Originally posted by piaffegirl View Post
                I feel like I have been under a rock, why didn't my GMO know something of this(NCDCTA). I showed all year, went to an Arthur Kottas clinic in July in Charlottesville, VA, I would have thought that I would have heard a comment or two.

                Why wouldn't this go thru the USDF since they have access to all of the membership the rule would pertain to?

                If they decide at the USEF convention to go thru with this, if we get 30% of members or 20% of GMO's to go against this, then we can have the rule reversed. I'm going by the way the rule states on the USEF website.

                I am fairly certain of my facts if not, just want all to know, I am not above being corrected.
                Hi, Piaffegirl. I got your phone message, by the way, and keep meaning to call you back, but I thought I would just respond here. I have attended the last 3 USDF conventions and VAGUELY recall mention of a potential future qualifying system. I never gave it another thought until I heard it presented by the Dressage Committee at this last convention. As soon as I got back from Florida, I alerted all of the Region 1 GMO presidents (since I am a Region 1 Delegate and a GMO Council representative) as well as published the proposal in our NCDCTA newsletter. I think they have heard the outcry and have shown that they are "listening".

                I can't wait to see what they decide.

                Jennifer Mitchell
                President, NCDCTA
                Last edited by JennNC; Jan. 10, 2008, 04:12 PM. Reason: punctuation

                Comment


                • #10
                  Dressage Daily link

                  Thanks for posting that. I have been asked who exactly votes on this, as I knew that the USEF meeting was not a BOG like USDF. Now I know.

                  Comment


                  • #11
                    Originally posted by piaffegirl View Post
                    I feel like I have been under a rock
                    Me too, I discover from COTH forum that my own GMO, that I've been a member for years and avid volunteer sent a letter of opposition to the USEF... Nothing on the CDS website: http://www.california-dressage.org/?... Does USEF "covert" proposal requires a "covert" letter of opposition?..

                    Any CDS members saw the CDS opposition letter?

                    Now, that said, look at the CDS Championships AA qualifying scores:
                    5 scores from 4 judges of 62% or better
                    Those are not easier than what USEF proposes.

                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Originally posted by Dressage Art View Post
                      Me too, I discover from COTH forum that my own GMO, that I've been a member for years and avid volunteer sent a letter of opposition to the USEF... CDS did NOT inform its members of this letter... Nothing on the CDS website: http://www.california-dressage.org/?... Does USEF "covert" proposal requires a "covert" letter of opposition?..

                      Any CDS members saw the CDS opposition letter?

                      Now, that said, look at the CDS Championships AA qualifying scores:
                      5 scores from 4 judges of 62% or better
                      Those are not easier than what USEF proposes.
                      CDS sent out an email about the proposed rule change to members. I can't remember the exact details.

                      Comment


                      • #13
                        Originally posted by Coreene View Post
                        CDS sent out an email about the proposed rule change to members. I can't remember the exact details.
                        Yes, I actually posted that email on COTH. CDS sent out the USEF proposal in an email, but CDS didn't state their support or opposition in that email or state that CDS will sent a letter of opposition to the USEF. How does CDS executive board know how the majority of the CDS members feel about the USEF proposal?

                        I'm still very interested in: "Does USEF "covert" proposal requires a "covert" CDS letter of opposition?.."

                        Comment


                        • #14
                          PVDA's Letter to the USEF BoD

                          This is on the PVDA's website. Well Done!

                          http://www.pvda.org/Documents/Letter...e%20Change.pdf

                          Comment


                          • #15
                            Marne:

                            Great letter, by far, the best, most logical, well founded letter yet!

                            Laura

                            Comment


                            • #16
                              pvda letter to DOC

                              Originally posted by claire View Post
                              This is on the PVDA's website. Well Done!

                              http://www.pvda.org/Documents/Letter...e%20Change.pdf
                              EXCELLENT! well stated.
                              Lori
                              Fly Teddy Fly!
                              Connemara's Rock!
                              RIP Reilly Go Bragh

                              Comment


                              • #17
                                TOTAL AGREEMENT

                                Originally posted by ltw View Post
                                Marne:

                                Great letter, by far, the best, most logical, well founded letter yet!

                                Laura
                                DITTO.........
                                Lori
                                Fly Teddy Fly!
                                Connemara's Rock!
                                RIP Reilly Go Bragh

                                Comment


                                • #18
                                  Originally posted by Dressage Art View Post
                                  Me too, I discover from COTH forum that my own GMO, that I've been a member for years and avid volunteer sent a letter of opposition to the USEF... Nothing on the CDS website: http://www.california-dressage.org/?... Does USEF "covert" proposal requires a "covert" letter of opposition?..

                                  Any CDS members saw the CDS opposition letter?

                                  Now, that said, look at the CDS Championships AA qualifying scores:
                                  5 scores from 4 judges of 62% or better
                                  Those are not easier than what USEF proposes.
                                  CDS was very vocal to its members in stating its position and asking the membership to speak out if they too opposed the rule change. I remember getting an email sent and forwarded by several people, chapter chairs etc, that was rallying for members to make their voices heard.

                                  I'm Foothills Chapter and it was widely discussed at our Dec. meeting/x-mas party with out chapter reps. sharing details of the conversations with Connie and others re; the proposal and its affect on USDF and CDS.

                                  As for the CDS AA qualifying standards in relation to the USEF proposal, its interesting to note that CDS has felt the need to create a second standard to qualify for a separate smaller regional championship within the state. They have obviously felt (and I agree based on my area and clientele) that there is a large untapped market of AA riders who find meeting the 5 scores from 4 judges (meaning lots of shows) @ 62% or better too much of a challenge given their finances, time, and resources. That same demographic will be the most affected by the proposed qualifying standards through USEF.

                                  Comment

                                  Working...
                                  X